State v. Hampton, 38346
| Decision Date | 25 October 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 38346,38346 |
| Citation | 559 S.W.2d 224 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. David O. HAMPTON, Defendant-Appellant. . Louis District |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Shaw, Howlett & Schwartz, Allan Goodloe, Jr., Clayton, for defendant-appellant.
Paul R. Otto, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, George A. Peach, Circuit Atty., Julian D. Cosention, Asst. Circuit Atty., St. Louis, for plaintiff-respondent.
Defendant appeals from his conviction of two counts of robbery in the first degree and one count of carrying a concealed weapon. On sentencing under the second offender act, defendant received sentences of 25 years for each robbery and 5 years for the weapons charge, all to run concurrently. We affirm.
Defendant's first point is that the trial court erred in not dismissing the jury panel after the prosecutor used all ten peremptory challenges to excuse black veniremen. The jury selected to try defendant, a black, was composed of six blacks and six whites. Aside from the obvious lack of prejudice to the defendant, the law is clear that utilization of peremptory challenges to "exclude all blacks from the petit jury in any one given case" is permissible. "The discrimination becomes unconstitutionally objectionable only if it is proved that the prosecutor in a given county has practiced that same kind of exclusion systematically in all cases." State v. Williams, 535 S.W.2d 128 (Mo.App.1976) (1, 2). There is no such evidence here.
Defendant also attacks the sufficiency of the evidence to support the convictions. Mr. Dietzel and Ms. Coburn were stopped outside a restaurant in south St. Louis by two black men carrying guns. The victims were ordered up against a wall and one of the robbers took a wallet from Dietzel and the other took a purse and coat from Ms. Coburn. The robbers then fled down an alley. The victims alerted a policeman a short distance away who gave chase on foot and apprehended two men in the alley. Dietzel's wallet was found on one of the robbers, Conway, and a pistol was found in the coat pocket of defendant. Ms. Coburn's purse and coat were found in the alley. Two other eyewitnesses to the robbery could not see the robbers' faces, but identified Conway and defendant as the participants by the flashy clothing they were wearing when apprehended. The victims positively identified defendant in court as one...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Ball
...this evidentiary support, the defendant's point must be denied. State v. Eaton, 568 S.W.2d 541, 544 (Mo.App. 1978); State v. Hampton, 559 S.W.2d 224, 225 (Mo.App. 1977); State v. Williams, 535 S.W.2d 128, 130 (Mo.App. Defendant's final contention is that the trial court erred in overruling ......
-
State v. Hastings, 43131
...in the attack on T..., essential elements of the state's case. See, State v. Shumate, 478 S.W.2d 328 (Mo.1972) (2, 3); State v. Hampton, 559 S.W.2d 224 (Mo.App.1977) (6); State v. Rezabek, 584 S.W.2d 430 (Mo.App.1979) (2, 3); State v. Mercer, 611 S.W.2d 392 (Mo.App.1981) (6). We can see no ......
-
State v. Savage
...whether or not the argument required the drastic remedy of a mistrial. The argument, if improper, was not flagrantly so. State v. Hampton, 559 S.W.2d 224 (Mo.App.1977). It was not personalized to cause the jurors to fear for their own safety. As distinguished from State v. Heinrich, supra, ......
-
Hampton v. Wyrick, 79-1284
...deadly weapon and a third count of carrying a concealed weapon. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in State v. Hampton, 559 S.W.2d 224 (Mo.App.1977). This ruling was followed by appellant's unsuccessful attempts to secure post-conviction relief in the courts of the State ......