State v. West

• Citation: 157 Mo. 309,57 S.W. 1071
• Parties: STATE v. WEST.
• Decision Date: 12 June 1900
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

57 S.W. 1071

157 Mo. 309

STATE v. WEST.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

June 12, 1900.

TRAIN ROBBERY — INDICTMENT — INTENT TO ROB — REFUSAL OF INSTRUCTIONS — EXCEPTION — DEFINING "INTENT" — INTOXICATION — ASSUMPTION OF FACT — EXCUSE OF CRIME — TRAP TO CAPTURE — INFORMANT — PARTICIPATION IN CRIME.

1. Under Laws 1895, p. 160, providing that "any person who in any way shall stop, detain, or arrest the progress of any railroad train, with intent to commit robbery thereon, shall be guilty of a felony," an indictment charging that defendant "unlawfully and feloniously did stop, detain, and arrest the progress of a certain railway passenger and express train," the property of a railway corporation, "by then and there giving to the engineer of said train a danger signal, by swinging a lighted lantern across the track of said railway, in front of said train," moving on a railway track of such company, in a certain county, "with the felonious intent then and there to commit robbery thereon," alleged a sufficient intent to commit a robbery, and was sufficient under the statute.

2. Where defendant saves no exception to a refusal to instruct on questions of law in a criminal case, he cannot predicate error on such refusal.

3. It was not in the province of the court, in a prosecution for attempted robbery of a railway train, to instruct the jury what facts would have established an intent on the part of defendant to commit a robbery on a train he had stopped.

4. It was not error to instruct that, if they found that defendant had stopped a train with intent to commit a robbery, the fact that he was intoxicated would be no excuse, and that they should disregard all testimony with reference to defendant's intoxication.

5. In a prosecution for train robbery, it was not error for the court to assume in its instructions that a white light was used by railroads as a danger signal, where it was otherwise left to the jury to determine that fact.

6. Laws 1895, p. 160, makes it a felony to stop a train with intent to commit a robbery thereon. Before a contemplated "hold up" occurred, one of the conspirators went to the railroad superintendent, and informed him of the time and place the robbery would be committed, and that it had been agreed that informant should take his co-conspirators to the scene of the robbery, to which the superintendent replied that he supposed that it would be all right for informant to do so. The superintendent then placed guards, in charge of a detective, on the train which the robbers designed to stop, and gave printed instructions to the engineer to stop when confronted with a danger signal. The engineer stopped on his own responsibility when he saw a danger signal given by the robbers, and not at the suggestion of the detective. Held, that the train was not stopped with the consent of the railroad company or the detective, but by the danger signal given by the robbers, though the train passed the man who gave the signal, a few yards; nor did the conduct of the superintendent amount to a consent to the robbery, or remove the criminal responsibility of defendant therefor.

7. Where the instructions in a criminal case covered every issue before the jury, it was not error to refuse other instructions, even though they contained some correct statements of the law, abstractly considered.

Appeal from circuit court, Pettis county; George F. Longan, Judge.

James L. West was convicted of stopping a train with intent to commit robbery thereon, and, his motion for a new trial being overruled, he appeals. Affirmed.

The defendant, with Eli J. Stubblefield, was indicted at the February term, 1899, of the Pettis circuit court. He was duly arraigned, and pleaded not guilty. A severance was granted, and each tried separately. Defendant was convicted, and sentenced to the penitentiary for 10 years. He appeals.

H. B. Shain, John D. Dale, and John Cashman, for appellant. The Attorney General and Sam B. Jeffries, for the State.

GANTT, P. J.

The indictment sought to charge an offense under the act of April 2, 1895 (Laws Mo. 1895, p. 160), entitled "An act in relation to the crime of train robbing and to provide a penalty therefor." The indictment is in these words: "In the Circuit Court of Pettis County, Missouri. April Term, 1899. State of Missouri, County of Pettis — ss.: The grand jurors for the state of Missouri, duly impaneled, sworn, and charged to inquire within and for the body of the county of Pettis and state aforesaid, upon their oath present and charge that heretofore, to wit, on the twenty-ninth day of November, 1898, at the county of Pettis and state of Missouri, James L. West and Eli J. Stubblefield unlawfully and feloniously did stop, detain, and arrest the progress of a certain railway passenger and express train, the property of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Missouri, by then and there giving to the engineer of said train a danger signal, by swinging a lighted lantern across the track of said railway, in front of said train, which said railway train was then and there upon and moving along the railroad track and railway of the said Missouri Pacific Railway Company, within said county of Pettis and state of Missouri, with the felonious intent then and there to commit robbery thereon, contrary to the statutes in such cases made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the state." The evidence tended to prove the following facts: The Missouri Pacific Railway Company is a railroad corporation duly organized under the laws of Missouri, and on the 29th day of November, 1898, and for a long time prior thereto and ever since, owned and operated a railroad from Sedalia, in Pettis county, to Kansas City, in Jackson county, known as the Lexington Branch of the Missouri Pacific Railway, and ran its trains over said branch. Georgetown, Hughesville, and Houstonia are stations on said railroad in Pettis county. On the night of November 29, 1898, the regular passenger train from Kansas City to Sedalia was stopped a short distance east of Hughesville, in Pettis county, by a danger signal, — the waving of a white light across the railroad track. The lantern was waved by a masked man, who held the lantern in one hand and a revolver in the other. The division superintendent, Mr. Hopkins, had been apprised that an attempt to rob the train would occur that night, and, in pursuance of this information, had caused a guard to be placed on the train. When the danger signal was displayed the engineer of the train responded with two short blasts, and immediately shut off the steam, and applied the air to the brakes, and stopped the train. As the engine approached, the man who was waving the lantern sprang to the left side of the track. One of the guards shot at him, and he shot at the guards on the engine cab, almost simultaneously. As soon as the train stopped, the guards jumped off and pursued the parties who stopped the train. The defendant, West, was arrested in the adjoining field. Thomas Furlong, who was in charge of the detectives, testified that he saw a man standing upon the bank of the cut above the place where the man who waved the lantern was standing, and this man, also, was shooting at the train. This man ran across the field, and the guards followed and arrested him. He identified the prisoner as James West, the defendant. When arrested he had two handkerchiefs around his neck, a sack in his overcoat pocket, and was armed with a revolver, and had a number of cartridges. The prisoner was brought to the train by the guards, and laid on the floor of the baggage car, and was identified by Barnett, one of the guards. While lying there he was approached by Furlong, and asked if he knew him. The prisoner answered, "You are De Long, aren't you?" and then said, "How did I get here?" He was brought to Sedalia on the train. Having heard that the defendant was feigning drunkenness, Mr. Hopkins and Mr. Manley went to the prisoner, and bent over him, close to his face, to ascertain if he had been drinking, but they could discover no smell of liquor on him. The other robber escaped from the scene of the hold up, but about half past 12 o'clock that night was arrested by the officers in Sedalia, and proved to be Stubblefield. He was wounded in the right elbow, and his clothing was shot. He was disguised. E. H. Adams testified that: He had lived in Sedalia for 17 years. Had been employed by the Missouri Pacific Railway as fireman and engineer for 15 or 16 years, but at the time of the hold up was not working for the company, but had an office in Sedalia. West and Stubblefield were both old employés of the Missouri Pacific. West, the defendant, had been employed as an engineer for 8 or 10 years. Some time in the latter part of June or first of July, 1898, James West, the defendant, came to the office of witness Adams, and said he was in need of money, and intended to hold up a Missouri Pacific train on the Lexington Branch. He said he had men who would help him, — Eli Stubblefield, Joseph West, and Robert Cunningham. Later on, Joe West was at a conference, and Stubblefield was there on two different occasions. In the latter part of October, West, the defendant, and Stubblefield were in witness' office, over Bank of Commerce, in Sedalia, and they then said they had made their arrangements, and were going to rob that train. They finally agreed to do it on the night of November 25th. The arrangement was that James West, Stubblefield, Cunningham, and Joe West were to meet witness Adams at Grand avenue and Main street crossing, and ride out to the place for stopping the train in Adams' surrey. Adams was to take them out and come back. After robbing the train, they were to cut the engine off, and ride back to Sedalia on that. For some reason the first appointment, for the 25th, failed, and they then set the 29th of November as...