State v. Massa, 35606
| Decision Date | 06 August 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 35606,35606 |
| Citation | 512 S.W.2d 912 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. William Roy MASSA, Defendant-Appellant. . Louis District, Division One |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Lawrence O. Willbrand, St. Louis, for defendant-appellant.
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., G. Michael O'Neal, Donald Bird, Asst. Attys. Gen., Jefferson City, Brendan Ryan, Circuit Atty., St. Louis, Charles G. Blackmar, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Clayton, for plaintiff-respondent.
Defendant was charged by information under the Second Offender Act with possession of Methamphetamine Hydrochloride, alleged to be a Schedule II controlled substance under § 195.020, RSMo. 1969, V.A.M.S. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the court assessed punishment at two years imprisonment.
Defendant testified on his own behalf at trial and admitted to having the prohibited substance on his person when arrested for several traffic violations. He sought to establish, however, that he was unaware of the character of the drug, and that he was not intentionally and consciously in possession of it. On direct examination defendant admitted to two prior convictions for assault with intent to rob. During cross-examination defendant further admitted to an arrest in California (for which he was convicted) for illegal possession of sleeping pills. Defendant subsequently testified that aside from the offense for which he was being tried, the arrest in California constituted his only involvement with narcotics. The prosecutor then asked: 'Do you recall being arrested on March 4, 1967, in St. Louis for possession of marijuana?' Defense counsel objected before an answer was elicited from defendant, and at a conference outside the hearing of the jury the prosecutor admitted that he had no knowledge of a conviction resulting from this arrest. The trial court thereupon instructed the jury to disregard the question and overruled defendant's request for a mistrial. Since the state admits the impropriety of the question asked defendant, the sole issue before us is whether the trial court erred in refusing to grant defendant a new trial.
It is a well established rule in Missouri that a criminal defendant who elects to testify on his own behalf may be impeached as any other witness and is subject to cross-examination on prior convictions for the purpose of affecting his credibility. State v. Amos, 490 S.W.2d 328, 330(1) (Mo.App.1972); State v. Frey, 459 S.W.2d 359, 360 (Mo.1970); §§ 491.050, 546.260, RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S. But although the credibility of a witness convicted of a crime may be tested by asking him about his convictions, he may not be asked about his arrests. State v. Rumfelt, 258 S.W.2d 619(1) (Mo.1953). And it is reversible error for a party or witness to be impeached by a showing of an arrest even where he had testified about previous convictions. Rumfelt, supra at 620(2); Harris v. Williams, 363 S.W.2d 51, 53(4) (Mo.App.1962). In Harris, objection to the question on arrest was sustained but the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Johnson
...these circumstances, the prejudicial effect of an improper reference to one additional crime would be minimal. But see State v. Massa, 512 S.W.2d 912 (Mo.Ct.App.1974). Johnson's next contention is that the court erred in not granting his requested instructions regarding alibi and equivocati......
-
State v. Wendell
... ... State v. Massa, 512 S.W.2d 912, 914(1--3) (Mo.App.1974). Nevertheless, once a defendant tenders the issues of his prior arrests and exposes a claim of harassment, ... ...
-
State v. Moyers
...escaped from jail; he assaulted police officers and led them on a car chase. Mr. Moyers further relies in part on State v. Massa, 512 S.W.2d 912 (Mo.App. 1974). In Massa, the defendant was charged with possession of a prohibited substance. Id. at 913. He testified to possessing the prohibit......
-
State v. Johnson, 39776
...inquiry into prior arrests. State v. Dunn, 577 S.W.2d 649 (Mo. banc 1979); State v. Pulis, 579 S.W.2d 395 (Mo.App.1979); State v. Massa, 512 S.W.2d 912 (Mo.App.1974). However, where a witness attempts to portray to the jury that he is of good character and therefore a credible witness, he m......