State v. Evans

Missouri Court of Appeals
1988 WL 72084, 1988 Mo. App. LEXIS 982, 755 S.W.2d 673 (1988)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A person committing a felony, such as burglary, is not entitled to a self-defense instruction when they use force against a victim who is lawfully attempting a citizen's arrest. Furthermore, the charge of first-degree burglary only requires the state to prove a non-participant was present in the building; it does not require proof that the defendant knew of the person's presence.


Facts:

  • On September 1, 1986, Darryl Throgmorton, his wife Tanya, and their daughter Renee returned to their apartment.
  • Upon entering, they heard a noise from the bedroom.
  • Darryl Throgmorton entered the bedroom and discovered the Defendant with his arms inside the window.
  • After being shouted at, the Defendant fled the scene.
  • Darryl Throgmorton pursued the Defendant and shouted for bystanders' assistance.
  • When Darryl Throgmorton caught up to him, the Defendant attempted to stab him with a screwdriver.
  • Darryl Throgmorton grabbed the Defendant's arm, causing him to drop the screwdriver, and both men fell to the ground.
  • The Defendant continued to flee but was subsequently apprehended by Officer Tackes, who arrived after a call for help.

Procedural Posture:

  • The State of Missouri charged the Defendant with burglary in the first degree and assault in the first degree in a state trial court.
  • At trial, the Defendant requested a jury instruction on self-defense, which the trial court rejected.
  • The Defendant also made a motion for judgment of acquittal on both counts, which the trial court denied.
  • A jury convicted the Defendant of both burglary and assault.
  • The trial court, finding the Defendant to be a persistent offender, sentenced him to seven years for burglary and a concurrent fifteen years for assault.
  • The Defendant appealed the judgment to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does a person caught in the act of committing a burglary have a right to claim self-defense when using force against the victim who is attempting a lawful citizen's arrest, and must the state prove the defendant knew a non-participant was present to sustain a first-degree burglary conviction?


Opinions:

Majority - Dowd, J.

No. A person caught committing a burglary does not have a right to claim self-defense for using force against a victim lawfully attempting to apprehend them, and the state does not need to prove the defendant knew a non-participant was present for a first-degree burglary conviction. The court reasoned that the right to self-defense applies only against the use of 'unlawful force.' Here, Darryl Throgmorton's attempt to apprehend the Defendant was a lawful citizen's arrest authorized by statute (§ 563.051.2). Therefore, the Defendant's use of a screwdriver constituted an assault, not a privileged act of self-defense. Regarding the burglary charge, the court interpreted the statute (§ 569.160) to mean that the mental state of 'knowingly' applies only to the act of unlawfully entering or remaining in a building. The presence of a non-participant is a strict liability aggravating circumstance that elevates the crime to first-degree burglary, and no culpable mental state is required for that element.



Analysis:

This decision solidifies the legal principle that the initial aggressor or wrongdoer in a criminal act cannot claim self-defense when resisting lawful apprehension by their victim. It removes any ambiguity about whether a fleeing felon can use force to escape and then justify it. The case also provides a key statutory interpretation of Missouri's first-degree burglary law, establishing the presence of a non-participant as a strict liability element. This holding simplifies the prosecutor's burden of proof in first-degree burglary cases, as they are not required to prove the defendant's state of mind regarding the occupancy of the building.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query State v. Evans (1988) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.