State v. Mitchell
Decision Date | 16 December 1902 |
Parties | STATE v. MITCHELL. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Clinton county; A. D. Burnes, Judge.
Newton Mitchell was convicted of an attempt to commit murder, and appeals. Affirmed.
Jno. A. Cross & Sons, for appellant. The Attorney General and Sam B. Jeffries, for the State.
Defendant was tried upon an information filed by the prosecuting attorney of Clinton county at the May term, 1901, and convicted of an attempt to murder John O. Warren. His punishment was assessed at five years in the penitentiary. The information is in the following words: A second count in the information charged the defendant with an assault with intent to kill, but, as the jury acquitted him on that count, it is not necessary to incumber this opinion with it. On the 16th day of March, 1901, John O. Warren, with his wife, was living in the town or village of Trimble, in Clinton county, of this state. Some time previous to the difficulty the defendant had boarded with Warren, the prosecuting witness. They had known each other for 20 years or more. On the night of the 16th of March Mrs. Warren had attended church, and on her return home she and her husband were standing in the lower room of their house, when they heard a noise indicating that some one outside was prowling around the house. Warren took a lantern, and started out, and as he came around the house saw two men walking off. He followed, and they quickened their pace. He followed them quite a distance, and then returned home. The taller of the two men had on a black overcoat and a black hat, and the smaller of the two wore a light overcoat and a black hat. From his long acquaintance with these men, their manner of walking and general appearance, Warren took them to be Newton Mitchell, the defendant, and Charles Wilhoit. After Warren returned from following these men, he went upstairs, where his wife and children had gone to bed. The defendant, having boarded in the house, knew how it was arranged. A bed stood in one corner of the downstairs room, and a dresser not far from it. After Warren had retired, — perhaps an hour, — a pistol was fired immediately at his house, and in five or ten minutes a second discharge of the pistol occurred. Examination was made of the result of these shots, and it was found that two shots had gone through the window. The bullet from one went into the pillow in the lower room, and the other hit the corner of the dresser. The window sash and pillow, with the balls found, were exhibited, identified, and offered in evidence. The evidence further disclosed that when Mrs. Warren came out of church that night with her little daughter the defendant came up, and imposed his presence on her, and she pushed her daughter between him and her. He followed her a part of the way to her home, — to within 100 yards of her house, — and then desisted. The daughter corroborated her mother's evidence. Another witness (Whitmore) saw defendant that night going in the direction of Warren's house in company with another man, taller than he was, who was wearing a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Conigliaro
...592 (1960) ; and firing a deadly shot into a bed where the actor mistakenly believed the intended victim was sleeping, State v. Mitchell , 170 Mo. 633, 71 S.W. 175 (1902). In cases of factual impossibility, "the defendant's mental state was the same as that of a person guilty of the complet......
-
State v. Davis
...never intended to shoot and kill Edmon Lourie does not excuse or exonerate him. He made the attempt. State v. Hayes, 78 Mo. 307; State v. Mitchell, 170 Mo. 633; People v. DuVeau, 94 N.Y.S. 225. The rule is that when there is an intent to commit a crime and any act is done towards its commis......
-
Hardy v. State
...at an empty bed where he mistakenly believes the victim is sleeping has committed attempted murder, but not an assault. State v. Mitchell, 170 Mo. 633, 71 S.W. 175 (1902). If a defendant procures the services of a "feigned accomplice"--someone who pretends to go along with a criminal undert......
-
State v. Davis
...295 S.W. (Mo.) 554. The indictment is sufficient in every respect. Sec. 3683, R.S. 1919; State v. Broyles, 295 S.W. (Mo.) 554; State v. Mitchell, 170 Mo. 633; State v. Scroggs, 170 Mo. 153; State v. Hayes, 78 Mo. 307; People v. DuVeau, 94 N.Y. Supp. 225; 1 C.J. 310, note 12. (2) The statute......
-
§ 27.07 Defense: Impossibility
...Yaffe, Note 88, supra; Daniel Yeager, Decoding the Impossibility Defense, 56 U. La. L. Rev. 359 (2018).[128] E.g., State v. Mitchell, 71 S.W. 175, 177 (Mo. 1902). The words "seemingly" and "almost certainly" are used in the text because one English trial judge, in giving instructions to a j......
-
§ 27.07 DEFENSE: IMPOSSIBILITY
...Impossibility Attempts: A Speculative Thesis, 5 Ohio St. J. Crim. L. 523 (2008); Yaffe, Note 88, supra.[128] . E.g., State v. Mitchell, 71 S.W. 175, 177 (Mo. 1902). The words "seemingly" and "almost certainly" are used in the text because one English trial judge, in giving instructions to a......
-
TABLE OF CASES
...v. State, 594 So. 2d 703 (Ala. Crim. App. 1991), 370 Mitchell, Commonwealth v., 135 A.3d 1097 (Pa. Super. 2016), 407 Mitchell, State v., 71 S.W. 175 (Mo. 1902), 377, 379 Mlinarich, Commonwealth v., 542 A.2d 1335 (Pa. 1988), 549 Moe, State v., 24 P.2d 638 (Wash. 1933), 275 Molasky, State v.,......