State v. Hall

• Decision Date: 26 May 1921
• Docket Number: No. 22672.,22672.
• Citation: 231 S.W. 1001
• Parties: STATE v. HALL.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

231 S.W. 1001

STATE v. HALL.

No. 22672.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

May 26, 1921.

Motion for Rehearing Denied June 23, 1921.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pemiscot County; Sterling H. McCarty, Judge.

Floyd Hall was convicted of first degree murder, and he appeals. Affirmed.

B. A. McKay, of Caruthersville, for appellant.

Jesse W. Barrett, Atty. Gen., and R. W. Otto and Robt. J. Smith, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.

WHITE, C.

The appellant, on a trial in the circuit court of Pemiscot county, the 28th day of July, 1920, was convicted of murder in the first degree and his punishment assessed at imprisonment for life in the state penitentiary. He was charged with having killed one John White on the ____ day of November, 1919. On one Friday in November, 1919, Floyd Hall, John White, and several other men and women were employed by one Rushing to pick cotton in a field which the evidence tends to show was about a quarter of a mile from the town of Cooter. In the afternoon of that day Floyd Hall and John White weighed in their cotton, and the defendant started for home. White, however, returned to the cotton field saying he wanted to make up his 200 pounds, after which he would go to a cornfield near and get some corn for his horses. He left the cotton field about sundown and started in the direction of the cornfield, which was separated from the cotton field by a hay patch and a swamp thicket. He was not afterwards seen alive except by his murderer. Next morning, Saturday, neighbors became apprehensive that something had happened to him; they instituted a search, and his body was found in the swamp thicket near the cornfield. He had 12 bullet holes in different parts of his body, apparently fired from both the front and the rear. The bullets were 22 caliber and fitted a 22 Winchester special rifle. Two gashes were found on his head, caused by a blow from some blunt instrument. There were indications of a struggle around the place where the body was found; the body had been dragged a short distance into the grass as if to hide it. All the surrounding circumstances indicated that the deceased had been murdered, probably the night before. A cotton sack and hat were found near the body.

The circumstances which tend to connect Hall with the crime are as follows: He was at work in the cotton field Saturday morning when the body was discovered and the crowd gathered around it, but he did not go with the others to where the body was; he immediately quit picking cotton and went away towards home. The tracks of gum boots, about No. 8, nearly new, were found around where the body was found, and those tracks led by a circuitous route toward the home of Hall's sister, Mrs. Alloyd, where Hall lived. A drainage ditch, called the "big ditch," ran through or near the swampy tract, and there was a bridge across the ditch in the direction of Cooter. Following the tracks along the ditch the witness found a 22-caliber Winchester special under some old stumps which had been thrown out of a field. The gun was empty. It was shown that Martin Hall, brother of defendant, possessed a 22 Winchester special which one or two witnesses had seen and one had borrowed; the brother and defendant lived at the same place. Red gum boots which could have made the tracks mentioned were found after the arrest of the defendant at the place where he was living, and blood was on one of the boots. The officer who went to arrest the defendant found him on the porch. Defendant immediately went into the house and the officer followed him through three rooms and got him at the back door. The officer told him he was charged with killing John White, and "he never uttered a word; just picked up a dipper of water and drank the dipper of water."

About 4 o'clock in the afternoon of the day White disappeared the defendant was seen by two or three witnesses coming from the direction of Cooter. He had a rifle in his hands, had on a pair of dark pants, a jumper, and a pair of boots. The gun was similar to the gun introduced in evidence which had been found near the place of the homicide. The defendant at that time was going in the direction of the bridge which was near the scene of the crime. A search of the house where he lived revealed remnants of a jumper found in the ashes in a sheet iron stove, where it had been thrown and burned with the exception of a piece of a sleeve and a button, which were rescued and produced at the trial. No explanation was offered by defendant regarding the boots or the remnants of the jumper.

The former wife of the defendant testified that she was divorced from him in April, 1917, and about a year later the defendant sued White for alienation of his Wife's affections. In a conversation in 1918, between Mrs. Hall and her former husband, he charged her with intention of marrying Mr. White, saying that he would get even with him. Other threats against White were shown to have been made by the defendant between the time of his separation from his wife and the homicide.

The defendant introduced evidence tending to show an alibi. Several persons swore to having seen him in and about the town of Cooter at different times during the afternoon of the day on which he was charged with having committed the murder. The defendant himself testified, accounting for his whereabouts during the afternoon and evening of that day. Dan Hall, brother of the defendant, testified and produced in evidence a gun, a 22 Winchester special, which he said was his brother Martin's gun. It was like the gun found near the body of the slain man, except that the latter was bent. He said that the gun which he produced had long been in the possession of his brother Martin. On cross-examination of this witness the state endeavored to show that he had bought the gun he produced at the trial since the homicide. The witness showed some confusion when questioned about his failure to produce the gun when search was being made.

The state, in contradiction of the testimony of Dan Hall, showed that he had failed to produce Martin's gun when it was first searched for at the house where his sister lived.

I. The appellant has presented no brief nor assignment of errors here. The record shows that on Monday, July 26, 1920, counsel for the state asked leave of court to indorse the names of certain witnesses on the information. The defendant filed no motion to quash the information for failure to contain the indorsement of such witnesses, but contented himself with objecting to the Indorsement of the names. The objection was overruled and the ruling is assigned as error in the motion for new trial. The witnesses Hied around Cooter, 20 miles from the place of the trial. Some of them had been subpoenaed long previously, and the complete list had been handed to defendant's counsel Friday, the 23d, before. The failure to indorse the names of all witnesses for the state on an indictment for a felony charge will not warrant the exclusion of the testimony of such witnesses, unless it appears that the defendant is prejudiced in some way in the conduct of his trial by the ruling. State v. Stegner, 276 Mo. loc. cit. 438, 207 S. W. 826; State v. Wilson, 223 Mo. loc. cit. 187, 122 S. W. 671. Tile trial court apparently discovered no such prejudicial result to the defendant, and this court finds no error in the ruling.

II. After objection to the indorsement of the names of the witnesses was overruled, appellant filed an application for continuance, setting up that while he had been given a list of the witnesses on Friday, the 23d, such witnesses lived 20 miles from the scene of the homicide, and the defendant had been unable to find what such witnesses would swear to, although he had made an...