State v. Maher, 52752
| Decision Date | 15 December 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 52752,52752 |
| Citation | 743 S.W.2d 561 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Robert J. MAHER, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Holly G. Simons, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for defendant-appellant.
William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Scott Templeton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for plaintiff-respondent.
Robert Maher was found guilty by a jury of five counts of robbery first degree, Section 569.020 RSMo 1986, two counts of armed criminal action, Section 571.015 RSMo 1986, and one count of tampering in the first degree, Section 569.080 RSMo 1986. Adopting the jury's assessment of punishment the court sentenced defendant to serve ten, fifteen, ten, ten and ten years on the robbery first degree counts and three years on each of the armed criminal action counts. These sentences were consecutive to each other for a total of sixty-one years. Defendant appeals only from the convictions of armed criminal action, Counts III and VII. He argues he was entitled to judgments of acquittal on these counts because the state failed to prove the article held by defendant during the robberies was a real gun. We affirm.
Since defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence pertaining to the charges of armed criminal action, a review of the facts is necessary. The testimony at trial involved questions regarding the activities of two men, one black and one white, who were the co-participants in two separate incidents of robbery on October 24, 1985. This trial involved charges pertaining to both incidents. For our purposes the white man is identified as defendant and the black man as Derrick Hutchinson.
On October 24, 1985 at about 7:30 p.m., Christine Messina and Richard LeGrand went to downtown St. Louis for the purpose of watching the Cardinals' World Series game at the Clarion Hotel. They went to the back door of the hotel to get into the lounge but the door was locked. As they began walking towards the front of the hotel, Richard felt a gun to his back and the two were informed they were being robbed. They turned around, saw Hutchinson and defendant, and noticed that defendant held a gun. They were pushed into a corner of the building and instructed to give up all of their money. Hutchinson took sixty-eight dollars from Richard and took Christine's purse and rummaged through it. Finding only change, he began searching Christine and stuck his hand down her shirt and rubbed her legs. Richard tried to step in and was punched by Hutchinson. Defendant shoved the gun into Richard's stomach. Thereafter, at defendant's suggestion, the two robbers fled the scene. Christine and Richard summoned the police and reported the crime.
Subsequent to this robbery, at about 8:30 p.m., Pat Lada, her sister Sue Parres and her brother-in-law Mark Parres went to downtown St. Louis to partake in the World Series celebrations. They parked their car in the parking garage outside of Busch Stadium. They left the car and walked out of the garage but returned after Pat and Sue decided to put their purses in the trunk of the car. Hutchinson and defendant approached and asked them for change. The defendant pulled out a gun and Hutchinson announced that it was a robbery. Hutchinson then took all of the money held by each victim: Pat had twenty six dollars; Sue had five dollars and fifty-cents; and Mark had one hundred eighty dollars. One of the men then demanded that Pat give up the keys to the car and when she did, the two robbers got into the car and drove up the ramp of the parking garage. Sue reported the events to a police officer. While so doing she saw the robbers leaving the garage. Hutchinson was arrested on the spot. Defendant fled, but was chased and captured. The money was recovered while still in discrete units. No gun was found in the area. Pat, Sue and Mark also identified defendant and Derrick Hutchinson as the men who robbed them. Because of the similarity of the crimes the victims of the earlier robberies, Christine and Richard, were summoned to a line up that same evening where they identified Derrick Hutchinson and defendant.
Section 571.015 RSMo 1986, in part, describes an offender of the armed criminal action statute as "any person who commits any felony under the laws of this state by, with, or through the use, assistance, or aid of a dangerous instrument 1 or deadly weapon 2 ..." Defendant maintains that the evidence produced by the state was insufficient to support a conviction of armed criminal action in that it was not shown beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant committed the felonies of first degree robbery with the use of any instrument capable of causing death or serious physical injury. It is defendant's position he should have been acquitted of these charges because none of the five victims were able to state with certainty that the article held by appellant was a real gun. They all testified defendant had a gun. His argument depends upon the proposition that on the present facts a "real gun" must be proven.
In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence required to sustain a criminal conviction, this court must accept as true all direct and circumstantial evidence and all reasonable inferences which are most favorable to the state and disregard the evidence and inferences contrary to a finding of guilt. State v. Sherrill, 657 S.W.2d 731, 737 (Mo.App.1983). Our focus is limited to whether the evidence was sufficient to build a submissible case and whether there was sufficient evidence from which reasonable individuals could find defendant guilty. State v. Williams, 652 S.W.2d 226, 227 (Mo.App.1983).
Within this scope of review, the jury could have concluded from each victim's testimony that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hillis, 53019
...348. The evidence presented by the state supports the finding of the jury that a real gun was used during the robbery. State v. Maher, 743 S.W.2d 561, ---- (Mo.App.1987). In his third point the defendant claims the trial court erred in finding him a class X offender under Section 558.019 wh......
-
State v. Briscoe, s. WD
...the victim's testimony alone made a submissible case showing the commission of the crimes with a deadly weapon. State v. Maher, 743 S.W.2d 561, 563 (Mo.App.1987). The Reverend Hall testified that the robber pointed a chrome handgun at him and that he gave up his wallet fearing that the fire......
-
State v. McCoy
...sufficient to submit to the jury the issue of whether or not defendant committed the crime of armed criminal action. State v. Maher, 743 S.W.2d 561, 563 - 564 (Mo.App.1987); State v. Hillis, 748 S.W.2d 694, 696 - 697, (Mo.App. 1988). A gun, in and of itself, is deemed a dangerous and deadly......
-
Maher v. State, 55161
...months for tampering to be served consecutively, for a total of 61 years. This judgment was affirmed on direct appeal. State v. Maher, 743 S.W.2d 561 (Mo.App.1987). Thereafter, movant filed a pro se motion seeking post-conviction relief under Rule 29.15. Counsel was appointed and subsequent......