State v. Rousan
1998 Mo. LEXIS 11, 1998 WL 32524, 961 S.W.2d 831 (1998)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
To convict a defendant of first-degree murder on a theory of accomplice liability, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accomplice personally deliberated upon the murder. This element of deliberation cannot be imputed from the principal actor but can be inferred from circumstantial evidence, such as the accomplice's statements, knowledge of the murder weapon, and continued participation in the crime after the killing began.
Facts:
- On September 21, 1993, William L. Rousan, his son Brent Rousan, and his brother Robert Rousan planned to steal cattle from Charles and Grace Lewis.
- While driving to the Lewis farm, the three men discussed killing the couple, agreeing that 'if it had to be done it had to be done.'
- William Rousan retrieved a .22 caliber rifle, loaded it, and gave it to his son Brent, stating it was 'in case anyone was home' and warning Brent that if caught, they would 'fry.'
- At the farm, the three hid until Mr. Lewis spotted Brent. Brent then fired at least six shots, killing Mr. Lewis.
- When Mrs. Lewis came out of the house, Brent shot her several times, but the wounds were not fatal.
- William Rousan followed the wounded Mrs. Lewis into her house, placed a garment bag over her head, carried her outside, and instructed his son Brent to 'finish her off.'
- Brent then fired a single, fatal shot into Mrs. Lewis's head.
- The three men, later joined by another brother, wrapped and buried the bodies, and stole property including two cows, a VCR, and jewelry.
Procedural Posture:
- William L. Rousan was charged in a Missouri state court with two counts of first-degree murder for the deaths of Charles and Grace Lewis.
- A jury in the trial court found Rousan guilty on both counts.
- Following the penalty phase of the trial, the jury recommended a sentence of death for the murder of Grace Lewis and life imprisonment without parole for the murder of Charles Lewis.
- The trial court imposed the sentences as recommended by the jury.
- Rousan, as the appellant, directly appealed his convictions and sentences to the Supreme Court of Missouri.
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 sufficient evidence of deliberation exist to convict a defendant of first-degree murder on a theory of accomplice liability when the defendant helped plan the underlying crime, provided the murder weapon, expressed an intent to kill if necessary, and directed the completion of the second murder after the first had occurred?
Opinions:
Majority - Covington, Judge.
Yes, sufficient evidence of deliberation exists to convict a defendant of first-degree murder as an accomplice. To establish accomplice liability for first-degree murder, the state must prove the accomplice personally deliberated, meaning they had 'cool reflection upon the victim’s death for some amount of time, no matter how short.' The court found overwhelming evidence of William Rousan's deliberation based on the three-part framework established in State v. Gray. First, Rousan made statements indicating an intent to kill prior to the murder ('if it had to be done it had to be done'). Second, he knew a deadly weapon was to be used, as he personally provided and loaded the rifle. Third, he continued with the criminal enterprise after the first murder occurred, even directing his son to 'finish off' Grace Lewis. Additionally, Rousan's own statements to police, where he claimed he was hired to kill the Lewises or was performing a mercy killing, provided a direct basis for the jury to conclude that he had made a decision to kill and coolly reflected upon it before the crime.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms and clarifies the standard for accomplice liability in first-degree murder cases in Missouri. It solidifies the principle that the accomplice's own deliberation is a required element that cannot be imputed from the principal. By applying the circumstantial evidence framework from prior cases, the court provides a clear roadmap for prosecutors to prove deliberation through an accomplice's statements, planning activities, and conduct during and after the crime. This makes it easier to secure first-degree murder convictions against individuals who, like Rousan, orchestrate and direct a murder without physically committing the final act themselves.
