State v. Evans, 47350

Decision Date04 September 1984
Docket NumberNo. 47350,47350
PartiesSTATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Antonio EVANS, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Claude Hanks, Creve Coeur, for defendant-appellant.

John Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., Michael H. Finkelstein, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for plaintiff-respondent.

DOUGLAS W. GREENE, Special Judge.

Defendant, Antonio Evans, was jury-convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.

In his sole point relied on in his appeal, Evans contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress, and in permitting his videotaped confession to be admitted in evidence. It is defendant's position that his confession was obtained by artifice and deception and was, therefore, inadmissible, citing Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), and State v. Pugh, 600 S.W.2d 114 (Mo.App.1980), as authority for his position.

Although the sufficiency of the evidence has not been questioned, it is necessary to relate a few basic facts in order to properly evaluate the contention of Evans raised here.

Richard Cunningham was shot to death in the early morning hours of October 30, 1982. Cunningham was killed in his automobile which was found at 1277 Ryan Terrace in Wellston, Missouri. Immediately prior to the shooting, Cunningham had been wearing three rings, one a marquise cut diamond, the second a 14-carat gold ring with a nine-chip diamond cluster, and the third an 18-carat white gold band. When his body was found, the rings were missing.

The police interviewed Cunningham's girl friend, Patricia Berger, who told them Cunningham was involved in drug dealings with Charles Shurn. She also said that about midnight on October 29, Cunningham was to go to the home of Shurn, who lived a short distance from where the body was found, to complete a drug transaction in which Cunningham was to give Shurn money to buy drugs. The police later went to Shurn's home and knocked at the door. After a period of 20-25 minutes, the door was opened by Thomas Weeks. Upon entering, the police discovered a .38 caliber revolver that had been thrown in the fireplace, and a number of aluminum foil packets that appeared to contain illegal drugs. Weeks, upon being questioned, indicated that he did not know anything "about no murder" and told them that Shurn and Evans were also in the house.

Shurn was found on the second floor. He was lying on a mattress and "appeared to be sleeping." He was wearing one of Cunningham's rings. Shurn was awakened and advised that he was under arrest for murder. Shurn told the arresting officer "he didn't know anything about no murder that took place over on Ryan Terrace, and he told me that Tone [sic] was with [Cunningham] all night and he must have killed him. He told me to check with Tone." By "Tone," Shurn meant Antonio Evans.

Evans was found hiding in the attic. He was fully clothed and lying on a mattress. The other two rings belonging to Cunningham were found partially under a rug within arms reach of Evans. Evans was arrested at the time and advised of his constitutional rights as elucidated in Miranda v. Arizona, supra. Evans was then taken to the Seventh District Police Station and booked in. He was again advised of his constitutional rights, and Evans said that he understood his rights. At that time, Evans said the two rings found under the rug were his, that he had possessed them for a long time and that he wanted them back.

The investigation continued. One of Evans' fresh fingerprints was lifted from the window glass of the front passenger door of Cunningham's automobile, which was found at the scene of the murder. The police also interviewed Sterling Stovall who stated that he was at Shurn's home in the early morning hours of October 30, and that when Stovall left at about 3:30 A.M., Cunningham, Shurn and Evans were still in the house.

At approximately 9:45 P.M. on October 30, Evans was booked into the Wellston police station. Willie E. Ealy, Director of the Wellston Police Department, questioned Evans the next morning, after again reading Evans his Miranda rights. Evans said that he understood his rights, and signed a form waiving those rights. Evans then told Ealy that "he wanted to cooperate; he wanted to clear himself." Evans then told Ealy that he had been at the home of Charles Shurn about 4 A.M. on the morning of October 30, and at that time heard Shurn and a man by the name of Ferrell Stamps discuss how they had robbed and killed Cunningham. Evans agreed to go to the St. Louis County prosecuting attorney's office to give a statement to that effect, and to testify, if need be, as a state's witness at time of trial.

After placing Evans back in a jail cell, Ealy went to the home of Ferrell Stamps. Stamps was not at home, but Ealy talked to his live-in girl friend, Diane Shores. Diane told him that on Friday evening, October 29, she had overheard, Shurn, Stamps, and an unidentified third person discuss how they were going to rob Darryl Cunningham. She said they were going to "pop him if he came over with the money." Diane agreed to go to the prosecuting attorney's office to give a statement.

At about 1:30 P.M., Ealy again advised Evans of his rights and released him from jail. After talking to his mother, Evans went with Diane Shores, Ealy and another police officer to the prosecutor's office. Evans was not restrained and was left in the waiting room with Diane, while Ealy talked to an assistant prosecuting attorney, presumably to tell him the details of the investigation. While waiting for Ealy to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • State v. Reese
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 31 de julho de 1990
    ...there is a complete absence of evidence at this time that subterfuge was employed to secure Reese's confession. See State v. Evans, 676 S.W.2d 324, 327 (Mo.App.1984), in which a confession was actually obtained by subterfuge, but was held to be voluntary. Viewing the totality of the circums......
  • State v. Wilson, 53257
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 26 de julho de 1988
    ...by trickery and therefore involuntary. The voluntariness of a confession is judged by the totality of the circumstance. State v. Evans, 676 S.W.2d 324, 327 (Mo.App.1984). Defendant was advised of his constitutional rights prior to each interrogation in which incriminating statements were ma......
  • State v. Molitor
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 31 de março de 1987
    ...unless the deception offends societal notions of fairness or is likely to procure an untrustworthy confession. State v. Evans, 676 S.W.2d 324, 327 (Mo.App.1984); State v. Pugh, 600 S.W.2d 114, 118 (Mo.App.1980). Hoffman gave defendant his Miranda rights with reference to a possible Dyer Act......
  • State v. Wilson
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 5 de abril de 1988
    ...waiver of the suspect's constitutional rights against self-incrimination, the confession is admissible in evidence. State v. Evans, 676 S.W.2d 324, 327 (Mo.App.1984) (citations Although there was some confusion in Officer Dowling's trial testimony, when the record is viewed in its entirety,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT