State v. Smith
| Decision Date | 12 February 1973 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 56646,57656,No. 1,s. 56646,1 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Willie J. SMITH, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Preston Dean, Assist. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Robert C. Babione, Assist. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
WELBORN, Commissioner.
Consolidated appeals from two judgments of conviction, on jury verdicts, for murder in the first degree, with consecutive life sentences.
On the night of October 31, 1969, Hermine Rohs, her son, Willy, and Willy's wife, Marilyn, were stabbed to death by intruders in Mrs. Rohs' apartment in St Louis. Various items of personal property were stolen from the victims and the women were raped.
Clues at the scene of the crimes led officers to Edward Johnson who had previously done some odd jobs ior Mrs. Rohs. Johnson was arrested and information obtained by police led to the arrest of willie J. Smith. Smith made a statement, detailing the offenses. He was indicted by a grand jury on three separate charges of murder in the first degree by indictments filed November 13, 1969.
In Cause No. 2519--R, Smith was charged with the murder of Marilyn Rohs. He was tried on that charge, beginning November 9, 1970. The trial resulted in a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree. After his motion for new trial was overruled, judgment in accordance with the verdict was entered on February 24, 1971. The appeal from such judgment is Cause No. 56,646 in this court.
The indictment in Circuit Court Cause No. 2517--R charged Smith with first degree murder in the death of Willy Rohs. On March 30, 1971, a motion to dismiss that charge was filed. The grounds of the motion were that in the trial of Cause No. 5219--R the state introduced into evidence the fact of the death of Willy Rohs and that to try him for such offense in Cause No. 2517--R would constitute double jeopardy in violation of state and federal constitutional guaranties. The motion alternatively sought to exclude imposition of the death sentence in Cause No. 2517--R because a life sentence had been imposed in the prior trial. The motion was denied.
Smith was tried in Cause No. 2517--R, beginning December 13, 1971. A jury returned a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree. After his motion for new trial had been overruled, judgment was entered in accordance with the verdict, with the sentence to run consecutively to that imposed in Cause No. 2519--R. The appeal from that judgment is Cause No. 57,656 in this court.
In this court, the appeals were consolidated. However, no claim of error has been briefed or argued in Cause No. 56,646 and that judgment is, therefore, affirmed.
In Cause No. 57,656, appellant contends that the conviction must be set aside because the issues in that case had clearly been determined by a valid and final judgment in the previous trial, and that the second trial placed him in jeopardy twice for the same offense, contrary to § 19, Article I, of the Constitution of Missouri, V.A.M.S., and Amendment XIV to the Constitution of the United States.
The answer to this contention is to be found in this court's decision in State v. Moton, Mo., 476 S.W.2d 785. In that case the defendant and another had robbed two persons in a service station holdup. The prosecution and conviction of the defendant for robbery from one of the victims were held not to preclude his subsequent prosecution for the robbery from the other victim. In that case, the court distinguishes Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469, and North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 89 S.Ct. 2072, 23 L.Ed.2d 656, relied upon by appellant here. Nothing need be added here to demonstrate the inapplicability of those cases on the issue here presented.
In the present situation, appellant was charged separately with the murder of two different persons. He was charged with two different offenses and found guilty of two separate and distinct offenses. As in Moton, substantially the same evidence was presented in both trials, but, unless and until the views of Mr. Justice Brennan in his concurring opinion in Ashe, 397 U.S. 448, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469, are accepted as constitutional requisites, the similarity of the evidence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Cepulonis
...417 U.S. 957, 94 S.Ct. 3086, 41 L.Ed.2d 675 (1974); People v. Carlson, 37 Cal.App.3d 349, 352, 112 Cal.Rptr. 321 (1974); State v. Smith, 491 S.W.2d 257 (Mo.1973); Model Penal Code § 1.07 (Proposed Official Draft 1962). Cf. Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469 (1970) ......
-
State v. Chambers
...act but two separate offenses where both robberies occurred almost simultaneously in a same or single transaction. See also State v. Smith, 491 S.W.2d 257 (Mo.1973), certiorari denied, Smith v. State, 414 U.S. 1031, 94 S.Ct. 460, 38 L.Ed.2d 322 (1973), which affirmed two convictions of defe......
-
State v. Neal, 57861
...as it convicts defendant and sentences him to ten years' imprisonment for that offense, must, therefore, be affirmed. State v. Smith, 491 S.W.2d 257, 258 (Mo.1973). With respect to Point I, the 3-count information in this case was authorized by Rule 24.04, which provides in part that all of......
-
State v. Johnson, 57471
...Marilyn Rohs, which conviction was affirmed on appeal. State v. Johnson, 488 S.W.2d 645 (Mo.1973). In the companion case of State v. Smith, 491 S.W.2d 257 (Mo.1973), Willie Smith's conviction for the murders of Marilyn and Willy Rohs was affirmed. The instant conviction is for the murder of......