State v. Greer

• Citation: 147 S.W. 968
• Parties: STATE v. GREER.
• Decision Date: 01 June 1912
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri

147 S.W. 968

STATE v. GREER.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

June 1, 1912.

1. ARSON (§ 37)—INTENT TO DEFRAUD INSURER —SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE.

In a trial for arson with intent to defraud an insurance company, in violation of R. S. 1909, §§ 4509, 4511, 4512, evidence held insufficient to support a finding that the defendant knew the property was insured or had any intent to defraud.

2. ARSON (§ 3)—INTENT TO DEFRAUD INSURER —BURDEN OF PROOF.

Where defendant was charged with attempting to burn a building and contents belonging to another, with intent to defraud an insurance company, in violation of R. S. 1909, §§ 4509, 4511, 4512, proof that he knew the building to be insured was necessary to a conviction; such knowledge being necessary to the intent to defraud, and not being presumed merely from the attempt to burn.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Moniteau County; J. M. Williams, Judge.

D. K. Greer was convicted of arson with intent to defraud an insurance company, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Convicted of arson with intent to defraud an insurance company, defendant appeals from a judgment of the circuit court of Moniteau county, fixing his punishment for said crime at imprisonment for 12 months.

Defendant resided at Tipton, in Moniteau county, and was engaged in buying junk, fur, and hides as agent for another party. He kept his desk in a small one-story wooden building owned by one Gus Steinkraus at Tipton. Said building was used by Steinkraus as a shoeshop and shoe store. Defendant and Steinkraus were intimate friends, and the latter kept defendant's books. Defendant appears to have been too illiterate to keep them himself. They resided in houses near each other in another part of town. They were jointly indicted, but separately tried, and each convicted.

The evidence tends to prove that Steinkraus had the building in which his shop was located insured for $300, and his stock of goods and fixtures for $600; and that the building and goods were worth as much as they were insured for.

On March 23, 1910, the families of both defendant and Steinkraus were away from home. On that day they each purchased two gallons of gasoline; defendant ordering his purchase sent to his residence, while Steinkraus took his to his shoeshop. The defendant kept a gasoline stove at his residence, and the can of gasoline purchased by him was seen there on the day following the fire by several witnesses. The merchants who sold the gasoline to defendant and Steinkraus testified that they were regular purchasers of gasoline, buying about two gallons each per week.

On the night of March 23, 1910, defendant and Steinkraus were seen walking together about Tipton until a late hour, and appeared to be drinking heavily. Defendant claimed to be waiting to meet his wife, whom he expected home on a night train. About the hour of 3:30 a. m., March 24, 1910, they were at Steinkraus' shop, and while there an explosion occurred, and the building was set on fire. The fire was almost immediately extinguished by citizens of the town by the use of a few buckets of water.

The evidence clearly shows that both defendant and Steinkraus left the shop immediately after the building began burning; and neither of them returned to assist in extinguishing the fire. One man was seen running from the building immediately after the explosion occurred; but the evidence does not show whether this was defendant or Steinkraus.

Defendant's version of the matter is that about 3:30 a. m. he and Steinkraus went to the shop to get some whisky, which had been left there; that after taking a drink of the whisky defendant went out at the back door to answer a call of nature, and in doing so upset a jug of gasoline setting on the floor; that after he returned, and while he was standing in...