State v. Flenoid, 62192
| Decision Date | 11 June 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 62192,62192 |
| Citation | 617 S.W.2d 75 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Nathaniel FLENOID, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Springfield Baldwin, St. Louis, for appellant.
John Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., John M. Morris, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Appellant was charged by Indictment with the crime of First Degree Murder, a class A felony, in violation of § 565.003, RSMo; and thereafter, he was tried to a jury which returned a verdict of guilty and fixed punishment under § 565.008.2, RSMo, at imprisonment for life. The court entered judgment accordingly and this appeal followed.
Although the facts involved the unnecessary and tragic death of one Helen Faibish on March 21, 1979, at 5947 Kingsbury in the City of St. Louis, any detailed recitation thereof would not aid in resolution of the primary problem presented, i. e., failure to instruct the jury as mandated by MAI-CR2d in the 15.00 Series applicable to homicides committed after May 25, 1977.
As noted, the charge was first degree murder and that was the sole and only degree of homicide submitted for consideration by the jury. Under MAI-CR2d 15.00, Note 3(e) on page 15-6 provides that:
(Emphasis added.)
Consistent therewith is the directive found thereafter on page 15-7 that: "... an instruction on conventional manslaughter (MAI-CR 15.18) must be given when any higher homicide offense is submitted."
To those aware of the problem, it is readily apparent that compliance with the seemingly clear instructions just noted would contribute more to the orderly administration of justice than have the efforts of this and other appellate courts to approve or disapprove of the absence thereof in specific cases.
Other points presented in written briefs and oral arguments involve issues that may or may not arise in the same context on retrial and need not be explored at this time.
The judgment is reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Love v. State
...5 would necessarily have granted a new trial. Otherwise, the case would have been reversed and remanded for a new trial. See State v. Flenoid, 617 S.W.2d 75 (Mo. banc 1981). But, again turning to the cynosure of this appeal, the pertinent issue is whether movant's counsel, or any counsel, s......
-
State v. Clemons
...grade of homicide. It would have been error for the trial court to have failed to give the instruction on manslaughter. See State v. Flenoid, 617 S.W.2d 75 (Mo.banc 1981). Furthermore, we believe there was sufficient evidence for the jury to convict the defendant of manslaughter. The jury d......
-
Blackmon v. White
...of actual prejudice. There were no cases suggesting routine reversal even on preserved error. These came later, see, e.g., State v. Flenoid, 617 S.W.2d 75 (Mo.1981). And the cases discussed above which suggested a policy of committing to the jury's discretion the determination of mental sta......
-
State v. Flenoid
...and sentenced to imprisonment for life. On appeal the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings. State v. Flenoid, 617 S.W.2d 75 (Mo. banc On September 14, 1981, appellant Nathaniel Flenoid was again convicted of first degree murder of Helen Faibish by a jury in t......