State v. Garrison, No. 45955

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtHOLLINGSWORTH
Citation305 S.W.2d 447
PartiesSTATE of Missourl, Respondent, v. William Marion GARRISON, Appellant
Decision Date14 October 1957
Docket NumberNo. 45955,No. 1

Page 447

305 S.W.2d 447
STATE of Missourl, Respondent,
v.
William Marion GARRISON, Appellant.
No. 45955.
Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.
Oct. 14, 1957.

Page 448

No brief filed for appellant.

John M. Dalton, Atty. Gen., Harold L. Henry, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Page 449

HOLLINGSWORTH, Presiding Judge.

By information filed in the Circuit Court of Greene County, defendant, William Marion Garrison, was charged with the crime of using and uttering as true a forged check with intent to defraud, as defined in Section 561.011, RSMo 1949, Supp.1955, V.A.M.S. Seeking imposition of the additional punishment prescribed under the habitual criminal statutes, Section 556.280, RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S., the information also alleged prior convictions of defendant of the crimes of forgery and his sentence to and discharge from the Missouri Penitentiary. Trial to a jury resulted in a verdict finding defendant 'guilty as charged in the information', the further finding that previous to the commission of said offense defendant had been convicted of a felony, to wit, forgery, under the laws of Missouri, imprisoned therefor in the State Penitentiary and discharged in compliance with the sentence, as charged in the information, and assessing his punishment at imprisonment in the State Penitentiary for a term of ten years. Following judgment and sentence, defendant appealed. No brief has been filed in his behalf. We, therefore, review the valid assignments of error set forth in the motion for new trial, Supreme Court Rule 27.20, 42 V.A.M.S., and the record entries designated in S.Ct. Rule 28.08.

Error is assigned in: (a) the overruling of defendant's motion for a directed verdict; (b) the admission into evidence of (1) a blank check (State's Exhibit 'C') taken from defendant's motor truck following his arrest and (2) the utterance by defendant of a second forged check on the same day of the utterance of the check charged in the information; (c) the denial of his motion to strike from the information the allegation of one of his prior convictions of forgery; and (d) the admission of certain of the evidence relating to his former convictions and the submission of that issue.

The evidence in behalf of the State tended to show:

On Saturday, May 26, 1956, in Springfield, Missouri, defendant entered the grocery store of Olive L. Hall and tendered a check, in words and figures following:

'Hedgpeth Commission Company

Ray Hedgpeth

No. 42327

Given for .... Cattle 2 Calves 3 Hogs .... Sheep

Union Stock Yards, Springfield, Mo. May 26, 1956

Pay To The Order Of Harry D. Denton $98.20

Ninty Eight ................................................ 20/100 DOLLARS

To Hedgpeth Commission Co., Springfield, Mo.

80-14 Present Through The Citizens Bank 80-14

This check void if not cashed within sixty days.

Hedgpeth Commission Company

Shippers Proceeds Account

By/s/Ray Hedgpeth.'

Believing the check genuine, Mr. Hall indicated his willingness to cash it. Defendant thereupon endorsed the name 'Harry Denton' on the back thereof, received the sum of $98.20, and purchased groceries in the amount of two or three dollars. On Monday, May 28, 1956, Mr. Hall deposited the check in the Citizens Bank. Shortly thereafter, it was returned with the notation 'No account'.

Formerly, there had been a firm of Hedgpeth Commission Company in Springfield, of which Ray Hedgpeth had been a member.

Page 450

The check was on a printed form used by that company when it was engaged in business. The Hedgpeth Company, however, had ceased to do business in 1945 or 1946 and had closed out its account in the Citizens Bank at that time. After the business was closed, Ray Hedgpeth had used some of the check forms around the home for 'scratch pads' and probably some of them had been taken to the 'junk pile'. The name 'Ray Hedgpeth' appearing on the check as drawer is a forgery and the name 'Harry Denton' appearing on it as endorser is also a forgery.

Over objection of defendant, Paul Francka was permitted to testify in substance following: He operates a restaurant and filling station in Greene County, Missouri. On the same day that defendant cashed the check at the Hall grocery store, he also presented to Mr. Francka a check identical in words and figures with the check given to Hall, except that the check tendered Francka bore the serial number 42328. Francka inspected the check, thought it was genuine and indicated his willingness to accept it. Defendant thereupon endorsed the name 'Harry D. Denton' on the back thereof and received the sum of $98.20 from Francka's clerk. That check was also a forgery.

On June 30, 1956, Harold C. Willis, a deputy sheriff of Greene County, possessed of a warrant for the arrest of defendant on a 'bogus check'...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 practice notes
  • State v. Anderson, No. 49703
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 9, 1964
    ...thereto in the confession, upon the ground that they were obtained by unreasonable or illegal search. State v. Garrison, Mo.Sup., 305 S.W.2d 447. Defendant contends that the court erred in admitting evidence which tended to show that he was guilty of other crimes and in permitting the circu......
  • State v. Redding, No. 49066
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 14, 1962
    ...such records may be certified by the warden of the appropriate institution. State v. Burns, Mo., 328 S.W.2d 711; State v. Garrison, Mo., 305 S.W.2d 447; State v. Peterson, Mo., 305 S.W.2d 695; State v. Romprey, Mo., 339 S.W.2d 746. An affidavit could hardly be of less effect than a certific......
  • State v. Green, No. 45637
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 14, 1957
    ...prove a material element of the crime actually charged and on trial. State v. Fisher, Mo., 302 S.W.2d 902, 905; State v. Garrison, Mo., 305 S.W.2d 447, decided concurrently with this case. We think that the money order receipts, the photostats of the money orders and the return receipt were......
  • State v. Harrington, No. 53491
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 31, 1968
    ...S.W.2d 737; State v. O'Brien, Mo., 252 S.W.2d 357, certiorari denied, 345 U.S. 929, 73 S.Ct. 790, 97 L.Ed. 1359; State v. Garrison, Mo., 305 S.W.2d 447; State v. Holt, supra. The validity of a search and the admissibility in evidence of the fruits of that search present issues collateral to......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
23 cases
  • State v. Anderson, No. 49703
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 9, 1964
    ...thereto in the confession, upon the ground that they were obtained by unreasonable or illegal search. State v. Garrison, Mo.Sup., 305 S.W.2d 447. Defendant contends that the court erred in admitting evidence which tended to show that he was guilty of other crimes and in permitting the circu......
  • State v. Redding, No. 49066
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 14, 1962
    ...such records may be certified by the warden of the appropriate institution. State v. Burns, Mo., 328 S.W.2d 711; State v. Garrison, Mo., 305 S.W.2d 447; State v. Peterson, Mo., 305 S.W.2d 695; State v. Romprey, Mo., 339 S.W.2d 746. An affidavit could hardly be of less effect than a certific......
  • State v. Green, No. 45637
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 14, 1957
    ...prove a material element of the crime actually charged and on trial. State v. Fisher, Mo., 302 S.W.2d 902, 905; State v. Garrison, Mo., 305 S.W.2d 447, decided concurrently with this case. We think that the money order receipts, the photostats of the money orders and the return receipt were......
  • State v. Harrington, No. 53491
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 31, 1968
    ...S.W.2d 737; State v. O'Brien, Mo., 252 S.W.2d 357, certiorari denied, 345 U.S. 929, 73 S.Ct. 790, 97 L.Ed. 1359; State v. Garrison, Mo., 305 S.W.2d 447; State v. Holt, supra. The validity of a search and the admissibility in evidence of the fruits of that search present issues collateral to......
  • 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