State v. Thomas
2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1010
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Defendant Maurice Anthony Thomas was convicted by jury of first-degree robbery and armed criminal action, with concurrent 12-year sentences as a prior offender.
- Victim was robbed in August 2010 in St. Louis after going to his backyard trash area; Defendant approached with a gun, forced the victim to his knees, rifled through pockets, and took the wallet and shoes.
- Victim’s stepbrother participated; he was arrested, identified Defendant in a lineup, and gave a taped statement implicating Defendant.
- Police created photo spreads; Victim tentatively identified a suspect in photos but wanted to see the gunman in person; later a physical lineup led Victim to positively identify Defendant.
- Defendant presented alibi testimony from his mother and sister; defense sought to introduce Slack as a witness to support an alternative perpetrator theory, which the court initially excluded via in limine.
- On appeal, Defendant challenges the identification procedures, Batson challenges to four strikes, and the exclusion of Slack as a defense witness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identification procedure admissibility | Victim’s identifications were reliable despite procedures. | Pre-trial identification was impermissibly suggestive and unreliable. | Identification admissible; no reversible error. |
| Batson challenges to peremptory strikes | Strikes were race-neutral and non-pretextual. | Strikes were pretextual to exclude African-Americans. | No Batson error; strikes upheld. |
| Exclusion of Slack as defense witness | Exclusion had no impact on the defense theory. | Slack’s testimony could exculpate Defendant and was improperly barred. | Error not preserved; no reversal. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Edwards, 116 S.W.3d 511 (Mo. banc 2003) (standard for reviewing suppression rulings)
- State v. Deck, 994 S.W.2d 527 (Mo. banc 1999) (consideration of suppression record and trial evidence)
- State v. Chilton, 119 S.W.3d 176 (Mo. App. E.D. 2003) (two-prong test for identification reliability)
- State v. Marlowe, 89 S.W.3d 464 (Mo. banc 2002) (Batson framework; discernment of discriminatory intent)
- State v. McFadden, 216 S.W.3d 673 (Mo. banc 2007) (pretext analysis in Batson challenges)