State v. Underwood, 55972
| Decision Date | 13 September 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 55972,No. 1,55972,1 |
| Citation | 470 S.W.2d 485 |
| Parties | The STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Lloyd UNDERWOOD, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Thomas D. Vaughn, Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Louis, for respondent.
Robert O. McNearney, Clayton, for appellant.
This is an appeal from a jury conviction of first-degree robbery with a thirty-year sentence imposed by the court under Sec. 556.280, R.S.Mo.1969, the second offender act.
Appellant, on December 19, 1969, on a parking lot at the rear of a building at 4928 North Broadway in St. Louis, using a loaded pistol, held up a woman who was returning from a nearby bank with cash. As the victim started to leave her car, appellant said, 'All right, hand over the money', and she handed appellant a canvas bag which she had on the front seat. Appellant was immediately arrested by two policemen who were in another car on the lot, watching.
Appellant asserts error because there was no showing that the victim was placed in fear of some immediate injury as required by Sec. 560.120, R.S.Mo., 1969. The basis of this argument is that the victim had been warned of the possibility of a robbery, and that she knew that the police were near at hand. There was no direct testimony that the victim felt fear, but fear need not be expressly shown, State v. Thompson, (Mo.Sup.) 299 S.W.2d 468, 474. It is difficult to believe that the mere knowledge of police observation would eliminate the normal reaction to being confronted by a partially masked man pointing a pistol and demanding the money. The point is overruled.
Appellant maintains that there was no proof that property of a substantial worth was taken. 1 Appellant fails to cite legal authority for such a proposition and it is without merit. Neither the robbery statute, Sec. 560.120, supra, nor the cases make such a requirement, State v. Gabriel, 342 Mo. 519, 116 S.W.2d 75, 78. The point is overruled.
Appellant's next assignment of error goes to testimony about the arrest of his brother and a .45 caliber pistol found near his brother. Without objection, a police officer testified defendant's brother, Tom Underwood, also was arrested 'out there that morning.' Later the arresting officer testified, saying the arrest was made about 150 feet from where the hold up occurred. An objection was made at this point to giving the name of the man arrested, but was overruled for the reason the name had already been brought out. Then the state had a .45 caliber pistol marked for identification and proceeded to question the arresting officer about it, apparently with the objective of identifying it as a loaded gun found in the brother's car or in his possession at the time of his arrest. But the witness was unable to make the identification and the gun was not offered in evidence, although we gather from the record that it was in the jury's view while the identification was being attempted. The best the witness could do was to say 'It was a gun similar, and this possibly could be the gun.' Counsel's objection to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Johnson
... ... Wynne,supra 182 S.W.2d at 299(8); State v. Underwood, 470 S.W.2d 485, 486(3, 4) (Mo.1971); State v. Merritt, 460 S.W.2d 591 (Mo.1970); State v. Holbert,416 S.W.2d 129, 133(8) (Mo.1967); State v. Smith, ... ...
-
State v. Gaye
...840, 843 (Mo.1962). And see State v. Tidwell, 500 S.W.2d 329 (Mo.App.1973); State v. Parker, 324 S.W.2d 717 (Mo.1959); State v. Underwood, 470 S.W.2d 485, 486 (Mo.1971), cert. den. 405 U.S. 928, 92 S.Ct. 980, 30 L.Ed.2d 802; State v. Harris, 452 S.W.2d 577 Finally, appellant claims that 50 ......
-
State v. Purvis, KCD
...motion. 'It is a clearly established rule that unverified allegations in a new trial motion do not prove themselves.' State v. Underwood, 470 S.W.2d 485, 487(5) (Mo.1971); State v. Lay, 427 S.W.2d 394, 402(6) Also contained in defendant's argument on his first point is the charge that the c......
-
State v. Manis, 11777
...shown. The normal reaction of being confronted by an armed man pointing a gun and demanding drugs is surely fear (State v. Underwood, 470 S.W.2d 485, 486(1) (Mo.1971)) and the plain implication of defendant's use of the gun in the manner narrated was to put the lawful occupants of the pharm......