State v. Masters, KCD
| Decision Date | 03 November 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. KCD,KCD |
| Citation | 530 S.W.2d 28 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, .v James H. MASTERS, Appellant. 27470. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
William G. Mays, II, Public Defender, 13th Judicial Circuit, Columbia, for appellant.
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Preston Dean, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before WASSERSTROM, P.J., and SHANGLER and DIXON, JJ.
The defendant was convicted by a jury of stealing property of the value of at least fifty dollars and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of five years.
On the night of June 15, 1973, a man who identified himself as Reverend H. B. Miller registered at the Columbia Best Western Inn and was given occupancy of Room 324. The guest made payment for the room by the use of a credit card issued to the City Union Mission. On the next afternoon, the housekeeper reported to the manager that the door of Room 324 displayed a DO NOT DISTURB sign although her records indicated that the occupant was to have released the room that day. The manager proceeded to the room, unlocked the door, and discovered that the television set, normally bolted to the chest, was missing.
Four days later, the defendant was arrested in his Kansas City apartment by police of that city for the theft and fraudulent use of credit cards. At the time of arrest, the defendant was in discomfort, apparently an adverse reaction to prescription medicine he had taken, so the officers delivered him under custody to a hospital. At the hospital, within 20 minutes of the arrest, the police searched the defendant and removed from his person a wallet which contained several credit and identification cards, among them those bearing the names Reverend H. B. Miller Herman B. Miller. On the day of arrest, after release from the hospital, the defendant admitted to the police that he had registered at a Columbia motel as Reverend H. B. Miller and that he had taken a television set from his room, but refused to sign a written statement.
At the conclusion of the opening statement by the prosecutor, the defendant moved the dismissal of the charge on the objection that the prosecutor failed to state any evidence of ownership of the television and that the set was taken without the permission of the owner. The dismissal was denied by the trial court and the point now comes on appeal.
The prosecutor is required by statute (§ 546.070, RSMo 1969) to state the case and offer the evidence in support of the prosecution. The purpose of the rule is to advise the jury of the facts which the State intends to prove and thereby inform the defendant of the contemplated course of prosecution so as to fairly enable the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Quinn, 38799
...of the owner's property is a significant interest for both the policeman and the citizen." 96 S.Ct. at 3101. See also State v. Masters, 530 S.W.2d 28 (Mo.App.1975), where the defendant's wallet was taken at a hospital which yielded incriminating Fourth, the retrieval of the bag came within ......
-
State v. Love
...F.2d 385, 392 (9th Cir. 1967); State v. Thompson, 425 S.W.2d 80 (Mo.1968); State v. Wragg, 395 S.W.2d 196 (Mo.1965); and State v. Masters, 530 S.W.2d 28 (Mo.App.1975). Attention now turns to the final component of defendant's first point (as construed by this court). Defendant appears to qu......
-
State v. Jones
...of the arrestee and seizure of property from his person. United States v. Heisman, 503 F.2d 1284 (8th Cir. 1974); State v. Masters, 530 S.W.2d 28, 30 (Mo.App.1975). Appellant cites Whiteley v. Warden, 401 U.S. 560, 91 S.Ct. 1031, 28 L.Ed.2d 306 (1971), to assert that his arrest was without ......
-
State v. Harper
...cause to arrest defendant existed. Thus, the arrest was lawful and the search incident thereto was permissible. State v. Masters, 530 S.W.2d 28, 30 (Mo.App.1975). The trial court properly denied the motion to The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. 1 State v. Givan, 573 S.W.2d 104 (Mo.......