The State v. Murray
| Decision Date | 12 February 1895 |
| Parties | The State v. Edward Murray, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Gasconade Circuit Court. -- Hon. Rudolph Hirzel, Judge.
(1) After defendant's conviction he filed his motion for a new trial. In due time the same was taken up, considered, and overruled by the court; to which action of the court in overruling said motion for a new trial, defendant did not take or save any exceptions. He will be taken by his failure so to do to have acquiesced therein, and is now precluded from presenting any exceptions saved during the entire trial except such as are preserved in the record proper. ""State v. Gilmore, 110 Mo. 7; ""Taylor v. Switzler, 110 Mo. 411; ""Wilson v. Haxby, 76 Mo 345; ""McIrvine v. Thompson, 81 Mo. 648; ""State v. Hitchcock, 86 Mo. 231; ""St Joseph v. Ensworth, 65 Mo. 628; ""State v. Burkhartt, 83 Mo. 433; ""State v. McDonald, 85 Mo. 539; ""State v. Pints, 64 Mo. 617; ""Bateson v. Clark, 37 Mo. 31. (2) This appeal must, therefore, be determined upon the record proper, on which the judgment should be affirmed. The indictment in this case is sufficient. It follows the language of a statute creating the offense, is in the form ofttimes approved by this court, and notifies the defendant of the accusation he is required to meet. ""State v. Blan, 69 Mo. 317; ""State v. Burns, 99 Mo. 472; ""State v. Sundheimer, 93 Mo. 316; ""State v. Turlington, 102 Mo. 647; ""State v. Stacy, 103 Mo. 12; Wharton on Homicide [1 Ed.], 269; Wharton's Precedents [3 Ed.], 114; R. S. 1889, secs. 3489, 3739. (3) It was unnecessary to allege confederacy or conspiracy. ""State v. Meyer, 99 Mo. 107; ""State v. Hopkirk, 84 Mo. 287.
At the January term, 1894, of the St. Louis county circuit court, the defendant, with his brother, James Murray, was indicted for murder of the first degree for the killing of Edgar Fitzwilliams. Counsel was assigned defendant, and at the May term following, upon his application, a change of venue was awarded him to the circuit court of Gasconade county, where at the September term, 1894, of that court, he was put upon his trial and convicted of murder in the first degree, and now prosecutes his appeal to this court, in which he is not represented by counsel.
The facts as disclosed by the record are as follows: On the night of December 23, 1893, defendant, his brother James, and two others, met and arranged to rob the conductor of a car on Page avenue in St. Louis county. When the car passed back on one of its return trips from the city of St. Louis, and not far from the end of the car track, Edgar Fitzwilliams, who was the conductor in charge, and Lizzie Schueble, a passenger, were its only occupants. The four negroes boarded the car, James Murray and one other getting on the front or west end, the defendant and the other negro getting on the rear end. By prearrangement between them, when the conductor was assaulted, one of the party who was in the rear end of the car was to pull the trolley line and thereby extinguish all the lights. When the conductor, Fitzwilliams, went in the car to collect the fares, one of the three negroes who were at that time inside the car shot and killed him; they then robbed him of what money he had upon his person, his watch, and made their escape.
Miss Schueble who was on the the car at the time witnessed the killing and robbery, having as soon as it occurred left the car and given the alarm to some persons in the neighborhood, and when the car was reached by such person within a very few minutes thereafter Fitzwilliams was found in the car dead. The murder was committed in St. Louis county. The defendant made one written statement and three other different statements to as many different persons, in which he admitted his presence at the time of the killing and robbery; that he boarded the car knowing the arrangement to rob the conductor and that he was present to perform his part, but denied further than this his participation in the crime. He was sworn as a witness in his own behalf and testified upon his trial to substantially the same facts, in regard to his connection with the murder, that he had stated on the other occasions.
After defendant and his brother James had been arrested and were in custody of the officers of the law in the city of St. Louis Miss Schueble went to see them and recognized James Murray as one of the negroes who robbed and killed Fitzwilliams, and was of the opinion that defendant was another of them but was not positive, but when taken into her presence the...
To continue reading
Request your trial