State v. Seymour

Decision Date10 March 1969
Docket NumberNo. 1,No. 53792,53792,1
PartiesSTATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Ronald Eugene SEYMOUR, Defendant-Appellant
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Norman H. Anderson, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Carl R. Gaertner, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Louis, for respondent.

Jay White, Rolla, for appellant.

WELBORN, Commissioner.

Appeal from three-year concurrent sentences for burglary in the second degree and stealing.

Sometime after the close of business on February 1, 1967, Stuckey's Gift Shop on Interstate 44 in Phelps County was broken into. Employees opening the shop at around 8:00 A.M. on the following morning found that a window in the men's restroom had been broken. Mud had been tracked around the interior of the building. $50 in one cash register was missing and an unspecified amount of coins had been taken from another register. 118 cartons of cigarettes were missing from a storage room. The employees who first arrived at the store found a plastic card case on the floor in front of the restroom door. The case contained a union card bearing the name 'Roy Taylor.' See State v. Taylor, Mo.Sup., 429 S.W.2d 254.

Trooper Cole of the State Highway Patrol was called to the scene. He examined the building and the area outside where he observed numerous footprints in the mud. He took possession of Taylor's union card.

Cole went to troop headquarters and then to Rolla. He was in the courthouse when he looked out the window and saw Taylor, whom he knew, in an automobile driven by defendant Seymour. The trooper went to his patrol car and followed the Seymour vehicle to the junction of Highways 63 and 72, south of Rolla, where he stopped the Seymour auto. He told the occupants of the auto that they were under arrest for the burglary of Stuckey's Gift Shop. Taylor was handcuffed and put in the rear seat of the patrol car. Seymour got in the front seat, beside the patrolman.

A call for assistance was made and shortly Trooper Aytes of the patrol appeared. Seymour and Taylor were again told that they were under arrest. Seymour was told that the troopers were going to check his auto. Cole went to the Seymour vehicle, removed the key from the ignition and opened the trunk. Three or four cases of cigarettes were observed in the trunk. Seymour's car was driven to troop headquarters, where four cartons containing cigarettes were removed from the trunk. The defendant filed a motion to suppress the evidence of what had been discovered in the Seymour auto, on the grounds that the search of the vehicle was illegal and in violation of defendant's constitutional rights under state and federal constitutions. A pre-trial hearing on the motion was held, and the motion was overruled. The evidence was presented at the trial over defendant's renewed objection to the legality of the search which produced it. On this appeal, the contention is renewed.

Appellant's point is twofold: First, there was not a lawful arrest, and, second, the search was not reasonably incident to the arrest. On the first argument, appellant states that the information known to the officers did not justify the arrest of appellant. 'Mere association,' he asserts, 'could lead to further investigation but is not sufficient to make probable cause for arrest.' As appellant acknowledges, the question is essentially whether the officers had probable cause at the time of the arrest to believe that appellant had been involved in the Stuckey burglary.

The officers knew that the Stuckey burglary had been committed. Taylor's 'calling' card found at the scene would have afforded reasonable grounds for his arrest. The basis of appellant's arrest necessarily was his association with Taylor. He was a known associate. He was known to have been with Taylor the previous evening. He was seen with Taylor on the morning after the fact of the burglary came to light. The investigating officer was not certain that the footprints at the scene of the offense had been made by more than one person, although he did surmise that more than one person was involved.

These are the facts which must justify the arrest. The state mentions the further fact that muddy gloves were discovered in the automobile. However, Trooper Cole, who made the original arrest, testified that he did not see the gloves until after he had advised Seymour and Taylor that they were under arrest. Therefore, that evidence could not properly be considered in determining the existence of probable cause for the arrest. Federal constitutionally protected rights are involved and determination of the validity of the arrest must be made in the light of the standards imposed for the protection of such rights. Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 91, 85 S.Ct. 223, 13 L.Ed.2d 142. The subsequent discovery of the gloves and the cigarettes cannot be relied upon to uphold the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • State v. Witherspoon
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 14, 1970
    ...a search be justified by what is uncovered later on; Byars v. United States, 273 U.S. 28, 29, 47 S.Ct. 248, 71 L.Ed. 520; State v. Seymour, 438 S.W.2d 161 (Mo.1969); for 'Thus the Government is obliged to justify the arrest by the search and at the same time to justify the search by the arr......
  • White v. Swenson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri
    • May 2, 1969
    ...appropriately cited and applied. And see more particularly, the most significant recent case of State v. Seymour, (Sup.Ct. of Mo., Div. 1, 1969) 438 S.W.2d 161, in which the standards articulated in Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 91, 85 S.Ct. 223, 13 L.Ed.2d 142 (1964) were stated and Seymour a......
  • State v. Drake
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • June 11, 1974
    ...his arrest. Defendant asserts that association with a known criminal is not, standing alone, reasonable grounds for arrest. State v. Seymour, 438 S.W.2d 161 (Mo.1969). We agree. However, one known or reasonably suspected to be guilty of a crime may be a circumstance to be considered in conn......
  • State v. Davis
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • February 8, 1971
    ...L.Ed.2d 637) or of a belated stopping of an automobile and arrest based on one's mere 'association' with a suspected burglar, State v. Seymour, Mo., 438 S.W.2d 161. The appellant is in no position to complain of the search of the automobile State v. McDaris, Mo., 463 S.W.2d 813, the relevan......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT