State v. Lovelace
| Decision Date | 05 June 1931 |
| Citation | 39 S.W.2d 533 |
| Parties | STATE v. LOVELACE |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Bass & Bass, of St. Louis, for appellant.
Stratton Shartel, Atty. Gen., and Henry H. Stern, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
Defendant was charged, convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for four years for manslaughter. He appealed in due form.
The indictment upon which he was tried charged that on July 18 1929 the defendant, while driving an automobile along Jefferson avenue in the city of St. Louis, operated the same carelessly, recklessly, feloniously and with culpable negligence drove it against and upon one Myrtle Deleal inflicting numerous blows and contusions upon her head and body, thereby producing death.
The evidence shows that Jefferson avenue runs north and south in St. Louis City. Eads avenue comes from the west into Jefferson avenue and there stops. An alley twenty feet wide continues on eastward. A street car line ran north and south on Jefferson avenue. Three blocks south of Eads avenue was a stop, and no other until Eads avenue was reached. A safety zone on the east side of Jefferson avenue opposite the end of Eads avenue extended south about 53 feet long, and was about 51/2 feet wide. The east rail of the northbound Jefferson avenue track was 28 feet 2 inches from the east curb of Jefferson avenue.
July 18, about 9:45 p. m., a street car coming north on Jefferson avenue made the usual stop three blocks south and continued on north. A Buick sedan going north at a rapid speed passed the street car about 200 feet south of the safety zone. A group of people were on the safety zone waiting for the street car, which was going about thirty-five miles an hour. The automobile drove into the group of people, hitting several of them. Some of them flew into the air. How many were injured the record does not show, but one woman, a Mrs. Murphy, had her leg broken, a small child was knocked down, and Mrs. Deleal was killed. The automobile swerved over to the curb and parked there. The motorman testified that he went over and looked at the driver, who was slumped down behind the wheel. This was the defendant Lovelace. Another man named Arnold was in the car with him. He got out of the car and ran away. An officer appeared about that time, ran after him, caught him and brought him back. The defendant was intoxicated, 'paralyzed drunk,' the officer testified. He couldn't talk intelligently. The automobile showed the effects of its collision with the people.
Defendant introduced evidence to show that he had a good reputation for peace, quiet, sobriety and morality. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, as stated. He filed a motion for new trial and later a supplemental motion. Both were overruled.
(1) The first error assigned is that the court erred in its definition of culpable negligence. The definition was the same as those approved by this court in numerous cases. State v. Millin, 318 Mo. loc. cit. 558, 300 S.W. 694, and cases cited.
(2) Error is assigned to the alleged failure of the court to instruct on all phases of the law applicable to the evidence in the case. The particular point made by appellant under that head was the failure of the court to instruct the jury on defendant's theory that Arnold was driving the automobile at the time of the accident. The instruction authorized the jury to find the defendant Cleveland Lovelace guilty if they found he was operating and in control of the automobile which produced the death, and they were required to find all the elements of the offense described in the statute, Section 3681, R. S. 1929. It was not necessary to give an instruction requiring a finding that Arnold did not drive the car; the defendant asked none and there was no evidence to show that Arnold was driving. The defendant admitted to the police officer that he was driving. He was behind the wheel, sitting as if stupefied by drink when the car stopped at the curb. The door on the right side was open and...
To continue reading
Request your trial