State v. Washington

632 S.W.2d 261, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 3427
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedJanuary 12, 1982
DocketNo. 43963
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 632 S.W.2d 261 (State v. Washington) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Washington, 632 S.W.2d 261, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 3427 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982).

Opinion

CLEMENS, Senior Judge.

Armed robbery. A jury found defendant Marvin L. Washington guilty and the trial court sentenced him as a persistent offender to 25 years in prison.

For the state, store clerk Trina Moore testified defendant had robbed her at gunpoint and took over $90. Defendant was soon arrested, returned to the store and identified by the victim; he had the stolen money.

Defendant later testified he took money from the cash register when the clerk had turned away; he denied threatening her or having a gun.

The trial court instructed on both robbery and stealing.

On this appeal defendant raises a single point. Arresting officer William Karabas had testified for the state to arresting and searching defendant but not to any statement made by him. Then on cross-examination defense counsel asked Karabas if he had interrogated defendant. Anticipating that defendant was trying to show he had made an exculpatory statement to the officer (to which defendant did testify later) the prosecutor objected. This on the ground defendant was attempting to show a self-serving statement. The court ruled defense counsel could not cross-examine officer Karabas about, anything defendant might have told him which the officer had not mentioned in direct examination. Defense counsel made no proffer.

Other than res gestae statements, which this was not, “defendant may not create evidence by adducing testimony of his own self-serving act or declaration... ”. State v. Brown, 312 S.W.2d 818[8, 9] (Mo.1958). To the same effect see State v. Sempsrott, 587 S.W.2d 630[6-9] (Mo.App.1979). The court did not err in barring cross-examination of the officer as to defendant’s self-serving statement.

Affirmed.

REINHARD, P. J., and SNYDER and CRIST, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. White
870 S.W.2d 869 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1993)
State v. Shire
850 S.W.2d 923 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
632 S.W.2d 261, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 3427, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-washington-moctapp-1982.