376 S.W.3d 58
Mo. Ct. App.2012Background
- Defendant Kenneth J. Richie was convicted by a jury of first-degree trespass (class B) and resisting a lawful detention (class A).
- State charged Richie with knowingly unlawfully entering real property at 707 Pine Street, open to the public, enclosed to exclude intruders.
- Evidence showed the garage door was unlocked and the premises were public, with no clear showing Richie lacked license or privilege to enter.
- Officer Frost detained Richie after pursuing a description of a suspect; Richie fled when approached.
- Trial court overruled defense motions; jury convicted on both counts; court imposed concurrent six-month sentences.
- On appeal, Richie challenges sufficiency of the evidence for both counts and the propriety of the resisting detention instruction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trespass: was there proof Richie knowingly entered unlawfully? | Richie entered an open-to-public garage; no unlawful entry proven. | State failed to prove he knowingly entered unlawfully as charged. | Reversed on Count I; insufficient proof of unlawful entry. |
| Resisting detention: was there sufficient evidence of reasonable suspicion for a lawful detention? | Detention supported by suspicious activity and fleeing evinces resistance. | No necessary reasonable suspicion to justify detention. | Affirmed on Count II; evidence sufficient to prove resisting detention. |
| Instruction 6: proper jury instruction for resisting detention? | Instruction properly directed the law and supported detention basis. | Fourth paragraph improperly framed detention basis as trespass. | Denied; instruction properly submitted under MAI-CR 3d 329.61. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Caldwell, 352 S.W.3d 378 (Mo.App.W.D.2011) (standard for sufficiency review)
- State v. Keeler, 856 S.W.2d 928 (Mo.App.S.D.1993) (state must prove elements of offense charged)
- State v. Williams, 303 S.W.3d 634 (Mo.App.E.D.2010) (detention lawful even when officer acts investigatively)
- State v. Burkemper, 882 S.W.2d 193 (Mo.App.E.D.1994) (when statute provides multiple ways to commit offense, information must charge one or more methods)
- State v. Jackson, 896 S.W.2d 77 (Mo.App.W.D.1995) (proof must track the act charged by the information and verdict director)