(Download) "State Missouri v. James Marvin Fields" by Supreme Court of Missouri Division 2 ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

eBook details

Title: State Missouri v. James Marvin Fields
Author : Supreme Court of Missouri Division 2
Release Date : January 12, 1968
Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
Pages : * pages
Size : 72 KB

Description

Defendant was charged by information and convicted by a jury of the armed robbery of a service station located on the north
edge of Springfield. Since defendant was charged also with a conviction and sentence for a prior felony and imprisonment therefor
and stipulated to the truth of that charge, the Court fixed the penalty and sentenced defendant to a term of ten years. This
appeal followed in due course. Defendant was exceedingly well represented at the trial and here by appointed counsel, one
at trial and two others here. The sufficiency of the evidence is not challenged, but the points made concerning the admission
of evidence necessitate a detailed review of the evidence. The following facts could reasonably have been found by the jury. Robert Utt and Clyde McBee were the attendants in charge
of a Hudson Oil Company filling station on the evening of July 4, 1967; it was located on the east side of Highway 13, just
inside the north city limits of Springfield. Utt looked out the rather large south window and saw a man, 5 or 6 feet away,
holding a large caliber automatic pistol, pointed at him; the man's face was partly concealed by a black hat and a black veil;
the man said "This is a hold-up," and told them to bring him the money and "come around" outside; the employees did go out,
taking about $80 or $81 with them, and the man instructed them to lay it on the walk, which they did; the robber then said
"that's far enough" and he picked up the money; he instructed them to travel in a certain direction across a fence and to
keep going; after they crossed the fence McBee looked back, and they immediately heard what sounded like a shot; McBee dropped
to the ground, but they then proceeded on, circled back and called "the law." When the officers arrived, they found a woman's
black hat with a veil lying on the grass outside the station. At the trial Utt identified an exhibit as that hat; he described
in part defendant's attire as a jacket which looked somewhat "purplish" under the fluorescent lights, and dark "loafers" with
a white substance on them. This witness also testified that when defendant was brought to the station a little later his height
and build compared favorably with those of the robber, that he had on the same type of shoes with white paint on them, and
that the coat which the officers brought in separately was similar to the one which the man wore. He testified that the station's
money was short between $81 - and $82 after the robbery. Utt did not positively identify defendant as the robber.