State v. Webb, 39126
| Decision Date | 01 May 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 39126,39126 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Tyrell WEBB, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Harris, Kirksey & Thomas, St. Louis, for appellant.
John D. Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., Paul R. Otto, Brenda Engel, Asst. Attys. Gen., Jefferson City, Courtney Goodman, Jr., Pros. Atty., Clayton, for respondent.
Defendant appeals from his conviction by a jury of second degree murder and resulting sentence of life imprisonment. We affirm.
The victim, Pierre Hawkins, and three other persons were in an automobile on Page Boulevard in St. Louis County at approximately 10 p. m. on July 13, 1976. The victim was driving, Linda Byrth was in the front passenger seat, Gregory Rutherford was behind her in the back seat, Judy Simpson was behind the driver in the back seat. All the passengers were seated at an angle so they could see each other and converse. A turquoise station wagon pulled up on the left side of the automobile of the victim, two handguns were displayed, and numerous shots were fired from the overtaking vehicle. Pierre Hawkins was struck in the head and arm by bullets and died from the head wound. Both Judy and Linda saw the guns and immediately ducked down on the floor. Neither saw the people holding the guns. Gregory saw the guns, and saw the faces of the persons holding them as he "eased down" to the floor of the car. He recognized defendant and Darrell Jones as the persons holding the weapons, but at that time did not see the driver. Hawkins immediately slumped over the wheel and the automobile continued several hundred feet down the road, eventually going over an embankment, down a steep hill to a building where it ran into a moving company truck parked near the building and stopped. All three passengers remained on the floor of the car until it stopped. Gregory then immediately exited the car and stated that "Tyrell and Darrell" had done the shooting. Judy was wounded in the hip and upon exiting the car took cover under the truck. Gregory ran up the hill and across Page to a drive-in movie to obtain assistance. As he was crossing Page he saw the turquoise station wagon proceeding in the opposite direction on Page and at that time identified the driver as Ricky Beavers. Gregory had previously known who Tyrell Webb, Darrell Jones and Ricky Beavers were. Upon returning to the Hawkins' vehicle after obtaining help Gregory stated that Tyrell Webb, Darrell Jones, and Ricky Beavers were the occupants of the car. When first questioned by the police, Gregory denied knowing the assailants because he testified he was "scared." Within an hour or so, however, he told the police the names of the occupants of the station wagon.
Gregory lived in the same house with Hawkins. Both Pierre Hawkins and a brother, murdered two weeks before Pierre, were narcotics dealers. Gregory denied that he was involved in narcotics traffic, even though he lived with the Hawkins brothers. Considerable evidence was elicited concerning the lighting conditions at the place where the shooting took place, and there was considerable dispute about exactly where on Page the shooting occurred.
Defendant presented an expert witness, a doctor specializing in ophthalmology, who testified to the difficulty in seeing and identifying the occupants of an adjacent vehicle under the lighting, stress, and temporal conditions existing at the time of the shooting. Defendant denied having been at the scene of the shooting, having participated in the shooting, or knowing Hawkins or Rutherford. He did not testify to an alibi.
Defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction, because the participation of defendant in the shooting was established only by the testimony of Gregory Rutherford and the accuracy of that identification was challenged by the testimony of the medical expert. The weight to be given the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses are determinations for the jury. The testimony of a single witness is sufficient, if believed, to support a conviction. State v. Tucker, 451 S.W.2d 91 (Mo.1970) (5). Here the witness, Rutherford, was unshakable in his identification of defendant and his companions. He had a prior knowledge of who defendant was and his accusation of defendant was made immediately after the shooting occurred. There was evidence that the light was adequate to make the identification. Even defendant's medical expert did...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Brown
...for appellate review, because a trial court cannot be faulted for failing to take action it was not asked to take. See State v. Webb, 583 S.W.2d 536, 538 (Mo.App.1979). Unlike Taylor, the trial court here had several days and the testimony of several witnesses to reconsider its pre-trial ru......
-
State v. Dixon
...court shall not be considered in any appeal from a jury tried case"); State v. Jordan, 751 S.W.2d 68, 75 (Mo.App.1988); State v. Webb, 583 S.W.2d 536, 538 (Mo.App.1979). Point The defendant next contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss because his constitutional ......
-
State v. Smith, 43104
...605 S.W.2d 117 (Mo.1980); State v. Hook, 432 S.W.2d 349, 352 (Mo.1970); State v. Mercer, 611 S.W.2d 392 (Mo.App.1980); State v. Webb, 583 S.W.2d 536 (Mo.App.1979). Certainly, the statement does not implicate defendant any further than he already was and does not prejudice him. Judgment affi......
-
State v. Amerson
...obtain a ruling thereon, the issue is not preserved for appeal. See State v. Brown, 953 S.W.2d 133, 139 (Mo.App.1997); State v. Webb, 583 S.W.2d 536, 538 (Mo.App.1979). "A trial court cannot be faulted for not taking action it was never asked to take." State v. Smith, 11 S.W.3d 733, 738 In ......