State v. Valle
| Decision Date | 22 May 1906 |
| Parties | STATE v. VALLE. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Francois County; Robt. A. Anthony, Judge.
James Valle was convicted of burglary, and appeals. Affirmed.
B. H. Boyer and W. S. Anthony, for appellant. The Attorney General and N. T. Gentry, for the State.
Defendant and one Clarence Mitchell were jointly indicted by the grand jury of St. Francois county, and charged with burglary in the second degree for breaking into a jewelry store belonging to one James Covington on the 5th day of November, 1903. On August 4, 1904, defendant was put upon trial in the circuit court of said county, found guilty by the jury, and his punishment assessed at three years' imprisonment in the penitentiary. After unavailing motions for new trial, and in arrest, defendant appeals.
Briefly stated, the facts are as follows: James W. Covington owned a jewelry store in the town of Flat River, St. Francois county, in which store there was at the time of the commission of the alleged offense a stock of goods, consisting of jewelry, watches, silverware, and other valuable things, kept for sale. The store was burglariously entered on the night of the 5th of November, 1903. At the time of leaving the store that evening, Mr. Covington placed the more valuable goods in the back part of the safe and locked it. He also locked the door opening into the building, and left a lamp burning therein. A brother of Mr. Covington was night watchman in the town at that time, and carried two of the keys to the front door of the store, which was situated at the corner of the main street of said town, and near the railroad tracks. Across the street from Mr. Covington's store was the store of one Jas. L. Darling, the street being 60 to 70 feet wide. The front of Covington's store was mostly of glass, and the door, which had two locks on it, was about two inches in thickness. Between 12 and 1 o'clock that night Mr. Covington was sent for, and came to the store, the door of which he found open. A crowbar and cold chisel were found lying on the floor, and the door locks broken. The crowbar fitted into a notch in the door, where the door strip had been pried off. Inside the store, near the safe, a monkey wrench, a funnel of paper and a lot of black powder were found. Mr. Covington also found some wedge shaped pieces of iron, the kind used in brakes on box cars. The handle of the safe had been twisted off, a hole made in the safe and some powder poured inside. A number of footprints were discovered in the cinder walk in front of said store. The night watchman testified that he was in said store a short time before the burglary, that everything seemed to be all right, and he left, locking both locks on the front door; that he saw defendant and Clarence Mitchell together in John Higgins' restaurant about 9 o'clock that night; that he afterwards saw defendant a little after 10, standing near the railroad track, about 80 feet from the Covington store. That he next saw defendant about an hour later, standing about the same place, and that defendant seemed to be watching for some one. The night watchman walked down the street in another direction and was gone about 20 minutes. When he returned he saw two men standing in front of and near the jewlery store. As he neared them they stepped apart, as if to let the watchman go in between them; then two other men came from around the corner of the store and drew their pistols. The watchman drew his pistol, and one of the men, Clarence Mitchell, knocked the pistol out of his hand. One of the men struck the watchman in the eye, wounding him seriously, and in the scuffle his pistol was discharged. These four men then took hold of the watchman, took him around the corner of the store, when he broke loose from them. At that time, defendant was standing across the street and seemed to be guarding for the others. As the other men ran they cursed the night watchman, and just then defendant ran, passing within six or seven feet of the watchman, and using the same form of profanity. Defendant joined the other men, and they all ran towards the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Conway
...Wallman because on an immaterial matter. State v. Murphy, 201 Mo. 691; State v. Taylor, 135 Mo. 109; State v. Barker, 296 Mo. 51; State v. Valle, 196 Mo. 29. (3) The demurrers as to both appellants were overruled. State v. Bresse, 33 S.W.2d 919; State v. McGee, 188 Mo. 401; State v. Martin,......
-
State v. Swindell
... ... in chief, and for that reason was erroneous; but the matter ... was accentuated and the damage made greater by allowing the ... doctor to be called as a witness in rebuttal to contradict ... the defendant's testimony on that subject. State v ... Valle, 93 S.W. 1115, 196 Mo. 29; State v ... Bunton, 280 S.W. 1040, 312 Mo. 655; State v ... Nicholson, 7 S.W.2d 375. (5) The restriction by the ... court on the argument of defendant's counsel and the ... remarks of the court incident thereto were unwarranted and ... prejudicial. State v ... ...
-
Moss v. Stevens
...not have been permitted to contradict Mrs. Mastin's answer. State v. Taylor, 134 Mo. 109, 154(a), 35 S.W. 92, 102(a); State v. Valle, 196 Mo. 29, 33, 93 S.W. 1115, 1116; Iron Mountain Bank v. Murdock, 62 Mo. 70, 75(4); Carder v. Primm, 60 Mo.App. 423, 424. However, if defendant stopped his ......
-
Marrah v. J & R Motor Supply Co.
...v. Clavert, 59 Mo. 243; State v. Mann, 83 Mo. 589; Brown v. Weldon, 27 Mo.App. 251; Scharff v. Grossman, 59 Mo.App. 199; State v. Valle, 196 Mo. 29, 93 S.W. 1115; Carder v. Primm, 60 Mo.App. 423; State v. Hewitt, Mo.Sup., 259 S.W. 773; Connell v. A. C. L. Haase & Sons Fish Co., 302 Mo. 48, ......