State v. Sheets
| Decision Date | 03 April 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. KCD,KCD |
| Citation | 564 S.W.2d 623 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Ronald SHEETS, Appellant. 29403. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Ronald Sheets, pro se.
John D. Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., Michael H. Finkelstein, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before SHANGLER, P. J., SOMERVILLE, J., and MASON, Special Judge.
As a result of a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Bates County, appellant was sentenced to six months imprisonment and a $500.00 fine for the offense of criminal trespass and two years for the offense of kicking a highway patrolman in the performance of his duties.
We are initially confronted with the State's Motion to Dismiss the appeal for failure of the defendant to comply with Rule 84.04, V.A.M.R. Appellant having proclaimed a religious distrust and bias toward lawyers and the organized bar, and questioning their ethics and morals, represented himself throughout. Although a lawyer was appointed by the trial court to assist him, the defendant steadfastly refused to take advantage of this professional assistance. Were it not for the trial error which is dispositive of this appeal, we could agree with the State that defendant's brief "violates every proscription to be found in Rule 84.04." However, that error was adequately preserved and the State's Motion is overruled. This trial error was brought to the trial court's attention in the Motion for New Trial, Rule 27.20, V.A.M.R., State v. Perryman, 520 S.W.2d 126(15) (Mo.App.1975), and adequately briefed and brought to our attention, Rule 84.04, V.A.M.R., Sherwood Medical Industries, Inc. v. Building Leasing Corporation, 527 S.W.2d 407 (Mo.App.1975). Only a brief resume of the facts is necessary.
On June 2, 1976, defendant and many of his religious compatriots occupied the building housing the religious group known as the Church of Christ at Zion's Retreat for the professed purpose of holding a prayer meeting. Prior to 1973 defendant and his friends had been members of this sect, but an internal squabble touching upon philosophy and theology led to a Vernon County Circuit Court ordered dissolution and division of the church property with the church building being granted to the above named religious group. Defendant and his faction built their own church building across the road, 80 feet away, and adopted the name of Church of Our Christian Heritage. Apparently, the court action, even though by agreement, did not lessen the tension. On seeing defendant and his friends in the church building, Duane Gayman, the pastor and the president of the corporation which owned the church property, called the church lawyer, who, in turn, called the Vernon County Sheriff's office. This precipitated the arrival of a multitude of law enforcement officers, including the sheriff, deputy sheriffs, state highway patrolmen and the prosecuting attorney. The prosecutor asked defendant and his friends to leave, as did Mr. Gayman. Their refusal prompted a somewhat forceful eviction. As defendant refused to abide by the repeated requests to vacate the church building, one of the law enforcement officers grabbed defendant and started to pull him from the pew. In being evicted defendant kicked a highway patrolman in the groin. There being no allegation that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury verdicts, this is an adequate synopsis of the background information which gave rise to the criminal charges filed against the defendant and, also, represents an overview of the facts the jury could have found from the evidence adduced.
Subsequently, defendant was charged in the Vernon County Circuit Court with the misdemeanor offense of trespass under Section 560.447(1), and in a separate Information with the felony offense of assaulting a police officer in the performance of his duty under Section 557.215. Thereafter, with the consent of the defendant, an amended Information was filed which charged the defendant with the same offenses in a two count Information. By agreement venue was changed to Bates County. A jury drawn from the citizenry of that county found the defendant guilty of both charges and assessed his punishment at six months in the County Jail and a $500.00 fine on the misdemeanor charge and two years at the Missouri Division of Corrections on the felony charge. Judgment was in accordance with the verdict. This appeal followed. Despite defendant's declaration both ways, this Court does have jurisdiction of this appeal, Section 3, Article V, Missouri Constitution, as amended.
As stated, in both his Motion for New Trial and brief defendant mentions the cross-examination permitted of his witness concerning the religious beliefs of the Church of Our Christian Heritage and peripherally alludes to the prejudice resulting from that cross-examination. The extent and impact of that cross-examination can best be understood by setting it forth verbatim.
Q (By Mr. Sanders) Does the Church of Our Christian Heritage and the Church of Christ at Zion's Retreat, do you all share the same religious philosophies and theological beliefs?
A We used to.
Q Do you now?
A We share many of them, yes.
Q (By Mr. Sanders) What does the Church of Our Christian Heritage believe in regard to Negroes? Do you share philosophies as to Negroes with the Church of Christ?
A Will you be specific?
A Can you be more specific? I don't know what you mean.
Q Does the Church of Our Christian Heritage believe Negroes have a soul?
Q (By Mr. Sanders) Do you believe that?
A You asked me if I believe the Negro has a soul?
Q Has a soul. Is the Negro a person who can receive salvation through Jesus Christ the same as you?
A Well, in order to answer that question correctly, I would have to give some background.
Q Do you believe that they do or that they don't?
A You put me in a difficult position.
Q Do you have a belief one way or the other?
A Yes, I do.
Q What is that belief?
A It is that they are not of Adam and, therefore, they don't have a soul.
A Jews are not of Adam; therefore, they don't have a soul. Now, if your meaning of a soul is the same as mine, that is like I said, without some preparation to answer a question like that might be stepping off in an abyss.
Q What is a soul?
A We are talking about whether the person was created with a body and mind or a body.
Q (By Mr. Sanders) Is it your belief that to kill a Negro is essentially the same as killing a cow then?
A No.
Q Do you feel that Negroes are God's children then and should be treated better than animals and should be treated like people?
A You asked me two questions. Which one do you want me to answer first?
Q Answer them both.
A First one, do I think that they should be treated better than animals?
Q Yes.
A Yes, because they are created above animals. Second question, what was that again, please?
Q Should they be treated like other people?
A They should be treated like other people like themselves are.
Q Should they be treated like Mr. Sheets or like me or like yourself?
A I would say, no.
A It goes back to how they were created. I believe you will find in Genesis, if I could make myself clear
Q You don't believe God created man in his own image?
A I believe there were two creations of man and that is my religious belief.
A Maybe I could clear that up for you, Mr. Sanders, by saying that at one time the Church of Our I am sorry, the Church of Christ at Zion's Retreat used to believe exactly as we believe.
Q (By Mr. Sanders) As you believe now?
A As we believe now.
Q Duane Gayman used to preach this?
A Duane Gayman's father started it.
Q Did Duane Gayman ever preach it?
A Duane Gayman preached it.
Q Has it been preached in that church since 1973 or 1974, when the Court dissolved it and awarded the property of one church from the other one; has it ever been preached since then?
A I have never been there.
Q Why weren't you there?
A Because I was over across the street at our own church.
Q That is right. Because you knew you weren't welcome, is that right?
A Because I knew we were dissimilar beliefs."
Generally, it is not proper to question a witness concerning his religious faith or beliefs unless relevant to some aspect of the case, State v. Jackson, 500 S.W.2d 306 (Mo.App.1973). The State seeks to justify on the four grounds that the interrogation was relevant to show trespass, that defendant opened the inquiry into religion, that the interrogation went to the bias and credibility of the witness, and even if erroneous, it was harmless as cumulative of previous...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Brewer
...and STEPHAN, J., concur. 1 State v. Hurt, 285 S.W. 976 (Mo.1926); State v. Duddrear, 309 Mo. 1, 274 S.W. 360 (1925); and State v. Sheets, 564 S.W.2d 623 (Mo.App.1978). ...
-
State v. Barton
...he were represented by counsel. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 834 n. 46, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975); State v. Sheets, 564 S.W.2d 623, 628(5) (Mo.App.1978); State v. Bruce, 554 S.W.2d 482, 483(2) (Mo.App.1977).3 References to rules are to Missouri Supreme Court Rules of Crim......
-
Barton v. State, 12090
...a criminal case (Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 834, n. 46, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 2541, n. 46, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975); State v. Sheets, 564 S.W.2d 623, 628(5) (Mo.App.1978); State v. Bruce, 554 S.W.2d 482, 483(2) (Mo.App.1977)) or a movant in a Rule 27.26 matter (Riley v. State, 545 S.W.2d 71......
-
Adail v. State, 42393
...of compliance with trial and appellate court rules and procedures as those who are admitted to the practice of law. State v. Sheets, 564 S.W.2d 623, 628 (Mo.App.1978). Third, movant's pro se Point Relied On directs this court to the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel at the evidentia......