State v. Williams, No. 37641
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
| Writing for the Court | GUNN; KELLY, P.J., and SIMEONE |
| Citation | 545 S.W.2d 342 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Lonnell WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant. . Louis District, Division Three |
| Docket Number | No. 37641 |
| Decision Date | 09 November 1976 |
Page 342
v.
Lonnell WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
Motion for Rehearing and for Transfer to Supreme Court
Denied Dec. 20, 1976.
Application to Transfer Denied Feb. 14, 1977.
Page 343
Scott Richardson, St. Louis, for defendant-appellant.
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Preston Dean, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Brendan Ryan, Circuit Atty., George A. Peach, III, Asst. Circuit Atty., St. Louis, for plaintiff-respondent.
GUNN, Judge.
Defendant was convicted of the second degree murder of Dan Rogan and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, defendant charges that the trial court erred: 1) in overruling defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal; 2) in refusing to give an excusable homicide instruction; 3) in restricting cross-examination of a State's witness. We find no error and affirm the judgment.
A friendly kiss placed by defendant on the cheek of Jackie Rogan, Dan Rogan's estranged wife, triggered Rogan's death. Defendant and a couple of friends stopped by Jackie Rogan's parents' house in St. Louis where a family soiree was in progress. Dan Rogan was also present, visiting Jackie. As defendant walked on the front porch, he paused to kiss Jackie lightly on the cheek or forehead. Rogan took umbrage over defendant's action and became bellicose. A brief struggle ensued between defendant and Rogan during which no blows were struck. Defendant departed but soon returned with two friends. The State's and defendant's evidence sharply diverge as to what next occurred. State's witnesses testified that as defendant approached the house on his return, he was brandishing a pistol; that Dan Rogan came out of the house, unarmed, shouting at the defendant, 'kill me, kill me'; that defendant then fired two shots at Dan Rogan, one striking him over the eye and inflicting a mortal wound.
Defendant's version of the occurrence is that he returned to Jackie Rogan's parents' house ostensibly for the purpose of extending his apologies; that as he approached the house, Dan Rogan came running at him with his hands behind his back, threatening
Page 344
to kill defendant; that defendant hastily retreated, firing his pistol twice into the air as a self-defense measure intending only to frighten Rogan; that somehow one of the bullets struck Rogan in the eye.At the State's behest, the jury was instructed on first and second degree murder. Defendant's self-defense instruction was also given, but his request for an excusable homicide instruction was denied.
Defendant first contends that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for judgment of acquittal. Our decision leading to this point is directed by the fundamental legal rubric that we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, accepting as true all evidence which tends to prove defendant's guilt and disregarding all contrary...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Milentz, No. 37188
...in the commission of an unlawful act, it would be proper to deny defendant an excusable homicide instruction. State v. Williams, 545 S.W.2d 342 (Mo.App.St.L.Dist.1976); State v. Merritt, 540 S.W.2d 183 (Mo.App.1976); State v. Smith, 539 S.W.2d 571 Defendant's next contention is that the tri......
-
State v. Merritt, No. 51389
...be entitled to an instruction, defendant must have acted voluntarily and intentionally in defense of his brother. See State v. Williams, 545 S.W.2d 342, 344 In support of his contention, defendant argues that his testimony met the burden of injecting the issue of justifiable use of force in......
-
State v. Zweifel, No. 39555
...475 It has been repeatedly held that self-defense and accident are mutually inconsistent. State v. Randolph, supra; State v. Williams, 545 S.W.2d 342 (Mo.App.1976). Certainly this is true where a dangerous weapon is involved, for either the defendant intentionally used the weapon (self-defe......
-
State v. Harris, No. 50006
...homicides, justifiable conduct, or self defense, implies that a defendant acted intentionally for his own protection. State v. Williams, 545 S.W.2d 342, 344 [4, 5] (Mo.App.1976). An excusable homicide defense, or accident, implies an involuntary, Page 237 unintentional, non-negligent act. I......
-
State v. Milentz, No. 37188
...in the commission of an unlawful act, it would be proper to deny defendant an excusable homicide instruction. State v. Williams, 545 S.W.2d 342 (Mo.App.St.L.Dist.1976); State v. Merritt, 540 S.W.2d 183 (Mo.App.1976); State v. Smith, 539 S.W.2d 571 Defendant's next contention is that the tri......
-
State v. Merritt, No. 51389
...be entitled to an instruction, defendant must have acted voluntarily and intentionally in defense of his brother. See State v. Williams, 545 S.W.2d 342, 344 In support of his contention, defendant argues that his testimony met the burden of injecting the issue of justifiable use of force in......
-
State v. Zweifel, No. 39555
...475 It has been repeatedly held that self-defense and accident are mutually inconsistent. State v. Randolph, supra; State v. Williams, 545 S.W.2d 342 (Mo.App.1976). Certainly this is true where a dangerous weapon is involved, for either the defendant intentionally used the weapon (self-defe......
-
State v. Harris, No. 50006
...homicides, justifiable conduct, or self defense, implies that a defendant acted intentionally for his own protection. State v. Williams, 545 S.W.2d 342, 344 [4, 5] (Mo.App.1976). An excusable homicide defense, or accident, implies an involuntary, Page 237 unintentional, non-negligent act. I......