State v. Goode

• Decision Date: 13 March 1920
• Docket Number: No. 21316.,21316.
• Citation: 220 S.W. 854
• Parties: STATE v. GOODE.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

220 S.W. 854

STATE v. GOODE.

No. 21316.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

March 13, 1920.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Texas County; L. B. Woodside, Judge.

Joseph C. Goode was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Hiett & Scott and Lamar, Lamar & Lamar, all of Houston, for appellant.

Frank W. McAllister, Atty. Gen., and C. P. Lemire, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

MOZLEY, C.

At the January term, 1915, of the Texas county circuit court, the defendant, Joseph C. Goode, was indicted upon a charge of having killed his father, Fount Goode; under such circumstances as to constitute murder in the second degree. At the April term, 1918, of said court, the defendant, having theretofore entered a plea of not guilty, was put upon trial, with the result that on the 17th day of said April term the jury returned a verdict of guilty as charged and assessed his punishment at imprisonment in the penitentiary for a period of ten years, A motion for new trial was duly filed, and on the 22d day of said term was by the court overruled. After said motion for new trial was overruled judgment and sentence of the court was duly rendered and imposed, Whereupon defendant duly appealed therefrom to this court.

Facts.

Deceased was the father of defendant, and they together with defendant's wife and deceased's wife (the mother of defendant) and Roscoe Goode, a brother of defendant, lived at the Goode home. On the 9th day of August, 1915, the deceased, Fount Goode, had been away from home and returned late in the afternoon, according to the testimony, about 5:30 o'clock. Defendant had also been away from home that day to a neighbor's where they were thrashing wheat, but he returned home before noon, changed his overalls, and remained at home the balance of the day. In the afternoon, at his mother's request, he cut down some plum trees growing in the yard. When his father returned he asked why they were cut and, not receiving an answer, he immediately picked up a mattock and started digging up the ornamental shrubbery in the yard, throwing said shrubbery out into the road which passed in front of the house. After this deceased came into the house and pulled off his shoes. The mother, Mary Goode, then went out into the road, picked up some of the bushes, and after cutting off the tops with an ax started resetting the roots near the southwest corner of the house. At this time defendant was sitting on a porch on the west side of the house. Deceased returned to the yard in few moments, pulled up one of the roots which the mother had reset, and requested her ti give him the mattock; this she declined ti do, whereupon deceased picked up an ax and threatened to strike her with it. At this juncture defendant ran into the house rind got a single barrel shotgun and some shells and went back to the west side of the house and found his father still threatening his mother with the ax, and he compelled him to put the ax down. Deceased then ran to the south door of the house and entered, taking the ax with him. Shortly thereafter it was discovered by the mother that deceased had left the house, and she told defendant that he had probably gone to secure a gun, and asked defendant to go into the house, where she went and nailed up the doors and windows. Defendant, however, told her that he preferred to stay out where he could have a fair view, and he accordingly went across the road and took a position near a machine shed at the northeast corner; that presently he heard a gun shot towards A. B. Castle's place, and in a few minutes saw his father approaching and called to him to stop. He answered by immediately raising his gun and firing at defendant. One of the shot took effect over defendant's right eye and one in his left leg. Defendant fired at deceased, but the smoke from the first shot was so dense that he could not tell whether his shot took effect or not. Defendant then turned and ran to the northwest corner of the barn, then turned eastward until he got out of the barn lot, and then in a southeasterly direction across the field lying east of the barn and reloaded his gun as he ran. As he crossed the ravine east of the barn he stumbled and almost fell, and, looking back, saw his father, who was pursuing him, raise his arms as though in the act of shooting, whereupon defendant fired again at his father and, without ascertaining whether the shot took effect, went on to the home of his uncle William Vandivort, and related to him and his family what had happened and how it happened. There was some conversation among the Vandivort family as to the advisability of going over to the Goode place to ascertain what damage, if any, had been done, but on account of the irascible temper and dangerous character of deceased it was thought best to defer the matter until morning, at which time he was found dead out in the field from a gunshot wound which had taken effect in his abdomen and breast. He was lying with his face down, partially on his shoulder, with his gun under him in his hand, with one barrel loaded and the other discharged. The doctors shortly afterward removed the shot from defendant that had taken effect near his eye and in his left leg.

The testimony further shows that six or seven months prior to the death of deceased, in Denny Coat's store, defendant said he got Into his father's whisky, drank part of it, and filled the bottle up with water. Gertrude Coats asked him if he was not afraid his father would get after him. He said "No; if his father fooled with him he...