State v. Dixon
| Decision Date | 08 February 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 55170,No. 2,55170,2 |
| Citation | 463 S.W.2d 783 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Calvin DIXON, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Thomas H. Stahl, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Raymond Howard, St. Louis, for appellant.
Appellant, Calvin Dixon, was convicted in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, of murder in the first degree, and his punishment was assessed at life imprisonment.
On January 17, 1969, three men robbed the New Delmonico Cafe in the City of St. Louis. Claude Wilson, owner of the cafe, was shot and killed. Appellant was identified as one of the three robbers by two employees of the cafe.
At the trial appellant did not dispute the fact that a robbery occurred or that Claude Wilson was shot and killed. Appellant testified at trial and his contention was, and is, that this is a case of mistaken identity; that he did not participate in the crime, but that he, and friends (who also testified), were at the Robin's Nest Bar in Venice, Illinois, at the time of the murder.
The determinative question on appeal involves an incident which occurred at the trial during closing argument. The following transpired during the closing argument of appellant's counsel: '* * * Ladies and gentlemen, let me point out something that is very basic in our system of justice. Police officers will tell you--we don't decide cases, the only thing we do is arrest people. The prosecuting attorney's office is not a court of law, and I don't think that any of you should think for a moment that had Calvin Dixon written letters of his innocence he would not be here today. If we had that type of justice in our country, then more prominent persons than Calvin Dixon would not stand trial, would get off, because they could get governors and mayors and some of the most powerful men in our society to write letters for them. If we had that type of justice, then that type of people would never come to trial. The only persons that would come to trial would be people like Calvin Dixon, who did not have the prestige of letterwriting that some other more prominent people would have. But the prosecutor is in the business of prosecuting, he is not in the business of letting people loose.
In State v. Montgomery, 363 Mo. 459, 464, 251 S.W.2d 654, 657, this Court said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Berns
...of defendant as was the statement of the prosecuting attorney in State v. Webb, 254 Mo. 414, 162 S.W. 622, 626 (Mo.1914). In State v. Dixon, 463 S.W.2d 783 (Mo.1971), the statement of the judge was held subject to be 'construed by the jury as indicating a belief in the guilt of the accused'......
-
State v. Hope
...it should be considered plain error. We disagree. Defendant relies heavily on State v. Castino, 264 S.W.2d 372 (Mo.1954) and State v. Dixon, 463 S.W.2d 783 (Mo.1971) to support his argument that the trial judge's remarks rise to the level of plain error. We note that Castino is easily disti......
-
State v. Engleman
...jury against a defendant and deny the defendant a fair and impartial trial, a verdict against the defendant cannot stand. State v. Dixon, 463 S.W.2d 783, 785 (Mo.1971). Appellant asserts the remarks of the trial judge which characterized the trial as "notorious" were such that they prejudic......
-
State v. Snow, 28171
...In support of his position he cites: State v. Embry, 530 S.W.2d 401 (Mo.App.1975); State v. Wren, 486 S.W.2d 447 (Mo.1972); State v. Dixon, 463 S.W.2d 783 (Mo.1971); State v. James, 321 S.W.2d 698 (Mo.1959); State v. Montgomery, 363 Mo. 459, 251 S.W.2d 654, 657--658(3) (1952); State v. Cast......