State v. Murchie

• Citation: 225 S.W. 954
• Decision Date: 01 December 1920
• Docket Number: No. 21941.,21941.
• Parties: STATE v. MURCHIE.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri

225 S.W. 954

STATE v. MURCHIE.

No. 21941.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

December 1, 1920.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Buchanan County; W. H. Utz, Judge.

Charles F. Murchie was convicted of stealing an automobile, and he appeals. Affirmed.

On the 16th day of December, 1918, the prosecuting attorney of Buchanan county filed an information in division No. 3 of the circuit court of said county, wherein the defendant, Charles F. Murchie, was charged with having stolen a Hudson Super-Six automobile, the property of Dell Delair, of the value of $1,500, and that he did so unlawfully and feloniously and against the peace and dignity of the state.

The defendant was tried in due course, and convicted by a jury and sentenced by the court in accordance with the verdict of the jury to 2 years in the state penitentiary. Motions for new trial and in arrest of the judgment were duly filed and overruled by the court and exceptions thereto duly preserved. We will set out said motion later on in this opinion.

At the expense of brevity we deem it proper to set out the testimony rather fully.

Dell Delair testified that he was the owner of the stolen car, and that he lived in Falls City, Neb. He described the stolen car as a Hudson Super-Six roadster, and placed its value at $1,500 or $1,600. He had driven it to St. Joseph, and on the evening of September 18, 1918, parked it in front of the Chrystal theater, and in company with his wife and baby went into the show, where they remained about an hour, and when they came out the car was gone, and he did not see it again for four or five weeks, when it was turned back to him at the police station. On cross-examination he said "he had a Nebraska state license on the car."

Rex Frye testified that —

"He was a police detective of the city of St. Joseph, and in connection with Mr. Reichen had charge of the automobile end of the business; that he and Reichen undertook to find the thief and the stolen car in the Delair case."

He further testified that —

"They kept a complete cabinet system of cards descriptive of stolen cars, that all officers had access to; that the particular card for this car remained in said cabinet a short time, and suddenly disappeared. I got the car from the defendant. The car was standing in the rear of Schnecker's drug store, on Franklin street, just west of Third next to Pat Welty's saloon. No one was with the car when we first saw it. We recognized it as being a stolen car. Murchie and Thompson came around the corner from off Third street, and, seeing us, they turned and went back. We stood there, and the same parties came back, and Murchie says: `You fellows havn't got anything on that car, have you?' And I says: `We certainly have; its a stolen car;' and I says: `Are you in possession of the car?' and he says `Yes: `Why,' he says, you have nothing on that car; I looked it up myself.' Then witness and Reichen concluded to take defendant and the car to the station, and he says: `For Christ's sake, fellows, don't get me in bad; if you take me down there they will swear that I stole that car.' (Italics ours.) I says: `Whom did you get the car from?' and he says: `I got the car from Mr. Gutzman, who lives between Wathena and Troy, Kan' We thought we would give him the benefit of the doubt, and asked him to deliver the car to the station before he went on duty at 12 o'clock that night, but he did not bring it. We asked him why he did not bring the car to the station as he had promised, and he says: `Well, sir, I didn't want them to find a stolen car in my possession, and so I turned it back to the man I received it from.' We asked him how he had gotten hold of the rightful owner, and he said he had gone to a wholesale liquor house and found a fellow there, a bootlegger, and he turned it over to him. We asked him why he should turn the car over to some one when he knew we had told him it was stolen. He said he didn't want to be found in possession of a stolen car; he said he believed that the car could be found at Tiedeman's, on Main street. We went with him to the place indicated, and was advised that no car had been there for several days; we took him back to the station and talked to him until about 2 o'clock in the morning, and he finally said: `I must tell you the truth; I rented a barn up on Powell street and put the car there;' and we went up there, got the car, took it to the station and redelivered it to Dell Delair."

Reichen's testimony, in all essential particulars, was the same as Frye's.

Vester Thompson testified that —

"He was with defendant when they got out of the car at Third and Franklin streets, where they left it standing; that when they were coming back to the car they saw the officers standing against the building. At Murchie's suggestion, we did not come up to the car, but went over to Mr. Welty's and stayed awhile. We first went into the barber shop, then come to the corner and turned around and went into Welty's saloon and took a drink then went over to the car."

The balance of his testimony, with some minor variations as to the conversation, due probably to forgetfulness or inability to hear all of it, was substantially the same as that of Reichen and Frye.

Mrs. Hulda Fellers testified:

"That after night on the 18th of September [the night the car was stolen] he wanted to rent her barn for a garage to keep it in, but she declined to rent it at that time. On the 21st of October defendant made the second attempt, and she rented the barn about 8 o'clock or in 8:15 in the evening. He said he wanted the barn to put his car in. When he paid me the rent he told me to make the receipt in the name of E. Beaver."

Silas R. Cogdill, who at the time lived at 1428 North Second street, testified that —

"He rented his barn to defendant to keep a car in; it was a single-seated car. Defendant said, `I want to rent the barn to put my car in.' He said he had the car to run down chicken thieves." (Italics ours.)

Maud H. Schulz testified that —

"Defendant lived at her house the 21st or September, 1918, and had an automobile for which he rented a garage the next door. believe it was a Hudson roadster. He said the car belonged to his uncle, B. F. Murchie."

Chief Johnson testified that the Nebraska license tag was found there back of the Place where the officers found the car on the next morning after the 18th. At this juncture the state rested its case in chief.

For defendant, J. A. Sudarth who claimed that he was almost related to defendant and his family, said:

"Defendant's reputation was good," but he neglected to say what it was good for. (Italics ours.)

W. R. Olney testified that —

"He had been intimately acquainted with defendant for five years, and did not know what his reputation for honesty and morality was."

J. L. Roseberry testified that —

"He had known defendant for six years; that he had worked for him from September, 1913, to January, 1918, and he thought his reputation was good, but he was not basing his testimony on what those who knew him generally said about him., but was basing it on what he had to do with him." (Italics ours.)

W. E. Renfro testified that —

"Defendant was a chum of his, and he was helping to repair the stolen car, and that defendant said `the car belonged to his uncle, B. F. Murchie;' that he advised defendant that there was only one of two things, he should either take the car down to the station or deliver it back to the party from whom he got it."

He also swore that —

"He had known defendant for about one year, and he thought his reputation for honesty, etc., was good."

He also swore that —

"He thought defendant was telling him the truth when he said the car belonged to his uncle, until two days later he was told by defendant that it belonged to a bootlegger by the name of Jack, whose last name he had forgotten, although this same Jack had been held at the police station, and defendant had gotten well acquainted with him, and had brought cigarettes and meals to him from outside while he was incarcerated."

The defendant, testifying for himself, traced his history and that of his family from an early date down to the middle of January, 1918, when he became chauffeur for the police department of said city, in which position he continued until he was arrested for stealing said car. He said the first time he ever saw the car, as near as he could remember, was about 7:30 o'clock the evening of Friday, September 20, 1918. Explaining how he got the car, he said:

"On the 21st of September, 1918, I went to the show and to a restaurant, and walked down to Fourth and Edmond streets, and a young fellow by the name of Jack — I did hear his last name, but I don't recall it now; I had seen him before several times at the police station where he was held for investigation. I heard he was a bootlegger and an automobile thief. I got well acquainted with him, and brought cigarettes and meals while he was being held. Between the time I saw him in the station and the time I met him at Fourth and Edmond, I had not seen him. I took the car because Jack left it on my hands for repairs. I do not know where Jack is, and have not seen him since two weeks before I was arrested for stealing the car. At that time Jack took the car with him saying he was going to Omaha. He returned in about three days, and turned the car back to me, and I kept it about two weeks, and never saw Jack after that."

He admitted that he lost the Missouri license tag off of the car and put a Kansas state license tag in its place. He admitted that —

"He would not say positively that ...