State v. Kuick

• Decision Date: 11 May 1948
• Citation: 32 N.W.2d 344,252 Wis. 595
• Parties: STATE v. KUICK.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

252 Wis. 595

32 N.W.2d 344

STATE

v.KUICK.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

May 11, 1948.

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court of Outagamie County; Oscar J. Schmiege, Judge.

Margaret Kuick was convicted of assault and robbery while armed and of striking the person robbed and she appeals.-[By Editorial Staff.]

Judgment affirmed.

On February 18, 1947, an information was filed in municipal court of Outagamie County charging the defendant with having on the 17th day of February, 1947, while armed with a loaded firearm assaulted and feloniously robbed another of money, and striking the person robbed, in violation of Sec. 340.39, Stats. The case was tried to a jury and the jury found the defendant guilty. From the judgment of the court entered March 4, 1947, sentencing defendant to imprisonment for a term of not less than three nor more than three years, the defendant appeals. Samuel Sigman, of Appleton, for appellant.

John E. Martin, Atty. Gen., and William A. Platz, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

ROSENBERRY, Chief Justice.

In this case the defendant's statement of facts is interwoven with immaterial matters, comment, argument, and stated in the third person, as is the appendix, so that resort must be had to the record to arrive at an accurate statement of facts. The assistant attorney general made no statement of facts because he rightly assumed that the court would read the record, but that is not a sufficient excuse for a failure to state the material facts.

While the rule does not require a statement of facts an orderly presentation of a case to an appellate court involves a consideration of the material facts. It is a great aid to the court in its consideration of the record if an accurate statement of the material facts is presented with appropriate reference to the record. That is the general practice.

On February 17, 1947, at about 1:45 a. m. the Conoco filling station, at times referred to in the record as the Progress Oil Company station, in the City of Appleton, was entered by Claude Stead, aged seventeen, and Robert Lund, aged twenty-six, who thereafter held up the attendant, took $80 from the cash register and one of them struck the attendant on the back of his head with the butt of a revolver. About fourteen blocks away from the station, while they were walking northerly on Bennett Street, Stead and Lund and the defendant were overtaken by the police and subsequently arrested and taken to the police station. Shortly after their arrival at the police station statements were taken from each of the parties under arrest. All three testified upon the trial of this defendant.

From the competent testimony offered and received on the trial the jury could properly have found that the defendant was associated with Stead for something like three months before the robbery; Stead introduced the defendant Lund a week before the robbery; two or three days later they met the defendant at Danny's lunch; the three met on Saturday night, the night before the robbery, at Danny's lunch; Margaret came in later and had been drinking; the three went to Druck's place. Margaret become intoxicated. When they returned to Danny's place from Druck's it was 2:15 Sunday morning. The three decided to go to Lund's home; when they arrived Mrs. Lund was there and the four of them slept in one bed that night; the next day the defendant, Stead and Lund had a discussion with respect to where they could successfully bring off a robbery. They left the lunch room about 1:30 a. m. for the Conoco station. When they arrived in the vicinity of the station the defendant was directed to go across the street and wait until she was rejoined by Stead and Lund. She knew what they were intending to do and that they were armed; that she was stationed across the street as a lookout while her two companions were robbing the station. As already stated, shortly after the robbery, while they were leaving the vicinity of the robbery, they were apprehended and arrested. Lund resisted arrest and in the course of the attempt to take them into custody he shot and wounded one of the officers. At the time of the trial the defendant was 18 years old. It further appears that during Friday, Saturday and Sunday before the robbery the three persons involved were closely associated.

While the defendant denies that she was to act as a lookout or had any part in the commission of the robbery it is difficult to see why an 18 year old girl would accompany two men on an expedition of this kind, knowing that they intended to commit a robbery, that they went armed; yet it appears without dispute that she asked to go along.

From all the circumstances the jury was clearly warranted in believing that she was fully informed as to the purpose of the other two parties and went along to be of such aid and assistance as occasion might require. While she had no whistle or other means of attracting their attention, according to her testimony, there is no explanation for her presence at the scene of the crime unless she was a participant in it. While there is evidence to the effect that the three intended to leave Appleton, certainly it was not necessary for her to be present during the course of the robbery in order to accomplish that.

There is ample evidence in the record to sustain the finding of the jury, and the judgment of the court must be affirmed unless there is reversible error in the record.

The principal error assigned is the admission of the confession of the defendant in evidence upon the trial. During the course of her examination by the officer at the police...