State v. Holmes, 41060

Decision Date20 January 1981
Docket NumberNo. 41060,41060
Citation613 S.W.2d 664
PartiesSTATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Cortez HOLMES, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Leslie D. Edwards, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for defendant-appellant.

John Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., Jan Bond, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for plaintiff-respondent.

SNYDER, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of three counts of first degree robbery, § 560.120, RSMo 1969, and three counts of armed criminal action, § 559.225, RSMo Supp.1976, upon jury verdicts. He was sentenced to a total of 30 years' imprisonment, consecutive ten year sentences upon two of the robbery convictions and one of the armed criminal action convictions and concurrent ten year sentences upon one of the robbery convictions and two of the armed criminal action convictions.

Appellant relies on two points in his appeal. In his first point he charges the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury upon the offense of stealing under $50 as a lesser included offense of the robbery charges. This point is ruled against appellant. In his second point appellant challenges his convictions of armed criminal action as violative of federal and state constitutional prohibitions against double jeopardy. Appellant's second point has merit, and his armed criminal action convictions are reversed, thus reducing his sentence to a total of 20 years' imprisonment.

In support of the charges against appellant, the state introduced evidence given by the three robbery victims, a witness to the robbery who pursued the robbers and co-defendant Herron. The testimony of these witnesses was that the three victims were robbed at approximately 10:45 p. m. as they were walking to their vehicle after leaving the Voyager Lounge in St. Louis. Initially, appellant's co-defendant Bailey asked the victims for money, but the victims proceeded toward their vehicle. Appellant emerged from a vehicle, aimed a sawed-off shotgun at Pamela Bates, announced a robbery, and took Ms. Bates' watch and purse and the purse of one of Ms. Bates' companions, Vicki Mullen. While appellant was taking property from Ms. Bates and Ms. Mullen at gunpoint, appellant's co-defendant Bailey aimed a pistol at the third companion, Angela McCoy, and took Ms. McCoy's purse. Appellant and co-defendant Bailey then exited in a vehicle driven by co-defendant Herron. The vehicle was pursued by a witness to the robbery who recorded the license number of the vehicle. Appellant fired a shotgun at the pursuer who then abated his pursuit.

Police arrested appellant and his co-defendants at the residence of co-defendant Bailey shortly after the robbery. The police testified they seized a sawed-off shotgun, revolver and the purses containing personal belongings of the three robbery victims. The robbery victims identified the co-defendants as the participants in the robbery approximately 15 minutes after the robbery at co-defendant Bailey's residence.

A gunshot residue examination of appellant's hand proved inconclusive. Appellant's defense was alibi. The jury did not believe his alibi testimony and it would serve no purpose to relate it here because no error was charged in connection with the alibi.

Appellant's first point relied on charges error by the trial court in failing to instruct the jury on stealing under $50 as a lesser included offense of robbery. Appellant neither requested this instruction at trial nor did he raise this issue in his motion for a new trial. Therefore, appellant has not preserved this point for appellate review and can prevail only if the failure to instruct upon stealing under $50 was plain error affecting substantial rights and causing...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • State v. England
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • September 16, 1988
    ...State v. Black, 54 Ohio St.2d 304, 376 N.E.2d 948 (1978); State v. Bridgeman, 51 Ohio App.2d 105, 366 N.E.2d 1378 (1977); State v. Holmes, 613 S.W.2d 664 (Mo.App.1981). This line of cases is particularly applicable here. The central issue presented was the identity of the robber. That the r......
  • Barks v. Bi-State Development Agency, BI-STATE
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • April 7, 1987
  • State v. Valentine, 63736
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • February 23, 1983
    ...appellant complains was not preserved for review, it can warrant reversal only if it can be classified as plain error. State v. Holmes, 613 S.W.2d 664, 665 (Mo.App.1981). Plain error and prejudicial error are not synonymous terms. No precise method exists for determining plain error but it ......
  • Williams v. St. Joe Minerals Corp.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • August 4, 1982
    ... ... Allbee's diagnosis ...         Plaintiff originally filed a two count petition in state court. Count I alleged conspiracy between Dr. Allbee and St. Joe in giving plaintiff a "false ... ...
  • 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