State v. Frame
| Decision Date | 03 June 1918 |
| Docket Number | No. 20660.,20660. |
| Citation | 204 S.W. 8 |
| Parties | STATE v. FRAME. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Criminal Court, Greene County; B. G. Thermal, Special Judge.
John D. Frame was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Upon an information charging him with murder in the first degree defendant was tried in the criminal court of Greene county, found guilty of murder in the second degree, and his punishment was assessed at 20 years' imprisonment. Defendant duly perfected an appeal.
The information charges him with the murder of one Arthur B. Huff. From some of the evidence it appears that the correct name of the deceased was Arthur B. Hufft. Some of the witnesses refer to deceased as Huff.
The killing occurred about noon July 27, 1916, in defendant's room in a dwelling house at Springfield, Mo. The defendant, deceased, and one D. A. Carr were night employés of an express company in that city, and went off duty about 7 a. m. The defendant and Carr walked to defendant's room. Cart complained of being sleepy. Defendant told him to take a nap while he went uptown to make some purchases. Defendant then left his room and went uptown, where he purchased his breakfast and started on an errand of making some purchases of shoes and clothing, and visited different stores for THAT PURPOSE. While on this shopping tour he met the deceased, and, according to defendant's story, the deceased, uninvited, accompanied him to some of the stores. They also went into different saloons, and treated each other to drinks of beer and whisky. After several drinks, deceased asked defendant where he was going to spend the afternoon, and defendant replied that he was going out to a picnic. The deceased thereupon stated that he would accompany him, and in furtherance of their plan to attend the picnic they rented a taxi and bought a case of beer and drove down to the house where defendant was rooming, arriving there about noon. At that time both men were described by the witnesses as being "drunk." They both went upstairs to defendant's room for the purpose of permitting defendant to change clothing. At this time defendant took a pocketbook which he claims contained about $50 out of his pocket and laid it on or near the bed, and went into an adjoining closet to change clothes. Carr was lying on the bed and had been asleep. After defendant went into the closet the deceased left the room and went downstairs and out to the taxi, where he remained a few minutes, and again returned to defendant's room. Shortly after this defendant came out of the dressing room and stated that his money was missing, and asked Carr and Hufft what they had done with his money. They denied any knowledge of its whereabouts. He looked about the room a few moments, and, failing to find it, walked over to his dresser and took therefrom a revolver, and commanded Carr and Hufft to hold up their hands. Carr and Hufft complied with the request and stood up on the opposite side of the room. Defendant, holding the gun on them, backed over to the door and to the edge of the hallway, which was a distance of about 12 feet from the two men. There the defendant called to Mrs. Polen, who together with her husband roomed at the house, to come in and search the two men. She declined, but informed her husband. Mr. Polen came out, and defendant asked him to search the two men, but he refused, and stated that he would call a policeman. After Polen had gone to call the policeman the deceased began remonstrating with defendant, and complained of being tired and wanted to lower his hands. Defendant testified that he told the two men that they must either hold their hands up or lie down on the bed with their backs to him, and that deceased said:
The state's evidence tends to show that the deceased probably lowered his hands without moving toward the defendant, and thereupon the defendant shot him. The deceased, falling in a corner of the room at or very near the place he was standing, died in a short time.
Defendant's evidence tends to prove that after deceased threatened defendant, defendant told him that whichever was the innocent party he would beg his pardon as soon as the mistake was discovered, and that in a few minutes the deceased lowered his hands all at once and started to his left-hand pocket with his hand, and made a rush across the room as though he were going to attack the defendant. The defendant testified:
"I shot him in self-defense, as I was afraid he was attacking me, and I didn't know whether he had a gun or what weapon he had on him."
The defendant continued to keep Carr covered with the pistol until the police arrived a few minutes later. When the police arrived defendant complained that the men had robbed him of $50. After defendant was placed under arrest, and while he was still in his room, he asked permission to search the bed for his missing money. This permission was granted, and he turned back the covers on the bed and found a roll of bills, and said, "That is my money." This money was turned over to the police. Evidence shows that it consisted of nine, $1 bills. Some small change was also found in a collar box on the dresser. Carr was searched, but only a dime was found on his person. One dollar and a pocketknife were found in the clothing of deceased. Several persons were in the room immediately after the killing, but the purse was not then found. The room was locked by the police. Later that afternoon one of the officers returned to the room, and a further search was made, at which time $3 or $4 in silver was found in a purse lying on a chair in the room. This purse was later identified as the defendant's purse.
There was evidence on the part of the state that immediately after the shooting defendant said, "I shot, for he wouldn't mind me," or "wouldn't obey me." The defendant denied that he made such statement.
Defendant testified that he had between $65 and $70 with him when he went uptown that morning, and that after making purchases and returning to his room he still had $52 or $53 left in his pocketbook. He also testified that he exhibited his money when paying for some of the drinks uptown that morning. Upon cross-examination defendant stated that deceased made one step toward him, and that he was 10 or 12 feet from him when he shot. Defendant also admitted that on March 24, 1909, he was convicted of burglary in the Greene county circuit court.
Defendant was 26 years old, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The State v. Allen
... ... presumption of guilt. State v. Swearingen, 269 Mo ... 177; State v. Cole, 213 S.W. 110; State v ... Stubblefield, 239 Mo. 530; State v. Garret, 207 ... S.W. 784; State v. Burns, 213 S.W. 114; State v ... Wansong, 217 Mo. 50, 58; State v. Frame, 204 ... S.W. 8; State v. Sloan, 207 S.W. 782; State v ... Little, 228 S.W. 797. (3) The trial court erred in ... permitting the bloody garments of the deceased to be ... exhibited before the jury, and erred in leaving them before ... the jury during the afternoon session, and during the ... ...
-
State v. Wright
...the State in its case in chief. State v. Burrell, 252 S.W. 709; State v. Bidstrup, 140 S.W. 904; State v. Creighton, 52 S.W.2d 556; State v. Frame, 204 S.W. 8; State v. Fredericks, 136 Mo. 51; Sec. 4070, R.S. 1939. (4) The fact that defendant denied cutting deceased did not deprive him of t......
-
State v. Dengel
...v. Swisher, 186 Mo. 1, 84 S. W. 911; State v. Kelleher, 201 Mo. 614, 100 S. W. 470; State v. Young, 99 Mo. 666, 12 S. W. 879; State v. Frame (Mo. Sup.) 204 S. W. 8; State v. Fitzgerald (Mo. Sup.) 201 S. W. 86; State v. Goldfeder (Mo. Sup.) 242 S. W. 403, collating some additional The answer......
-
State v. Wright
...State in its case in chief. State v. Burrell, 252 S.W. 709; State v. Bidstrup, 140 S.W. 904; State v. Creighton, 52 S.W. (2d) 556; State v. Frame, 204 S.W. 8; State v. Fredericks, 136 Mo. 51; Sec. 4070, R.S. 1939. (4) The fact that defendant denied cutting deceased did not deprive him of th......