421 S.W.3d 560
Mo. Ct. App.2014Background
- Victim Robert Eidman was shot and killed in his insurance office on June 8, 2007; wallet and gun were never recovered.
- Surveillance placed a Ford Focus near the office; months later White and co-defendant Cleo Hines were stopped in a Focus; White’s DNA matched a swab from the victim’s back pocket.
- White confessed in a recorded interview that he and Hines robbed Eidman, that the gun was his, and that Hines fired the shots; his accounts varied on details.
- White was convicted by jury of first-degree murder and first-degree robbery; sentenced to life without parole plus a consecutive life sentence.
- On appeal White raised two main claims: (1) Instruction 7 (first‑degree murder verdict director) misstated the deliberation element, and (2) admission of Hines’s out‑of‑court statement identifying where White hid the gun was erroneous.
Issues
| Issue | White’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Instruction 7 failed to require a finding of deliberation for the killer (accomplice) such that White’s first‑degree murder conviction is invalid | Instruction omitted ascribing deliberation to Hines and thus could not support convicting White of first‑degree murder based on aiding/encouraging | Instruction read as a whole required deliberation by White; under Ervin the State need not prove accomplice’s deliberation; any error was not prejudicial | Affirmed — instruction flawed in form but, read as a whole and under controlling precedent, contained required elements for convicting White of first‑degree murder; no plain error shown |
| Whether trial court erred by admitting Hines’s out‑of‑court statement (that White hid the gun) after a pretrial motion in limine excluded Hines’s statements | Admission violated the in limine order and prejudiced White; statement was inadmissible hearsay | Defense counsel affirmatively waived objection at trial when counsel said she had no objection; thus appellate review (including plain error) is waived | Affirmed — waiver applies; counsel’s on‑the‑record “no objection” and failure to raise the claim in a motion for new trial preclude appellate review |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Wurtzberger, 40 S.W.3d 893 (Mo. banc 2001) (appellate discretion to review unpreserved instructional error for manifest injustice)
- State v. Doolittle, 896 S.W.2d 27 (Mo. banc 1995) (plain‑error standard for jury instructions)
- State v. Ervin, 885 S.W.2d 905 (Mo. banc 1992) (accessory may be guilty of a higher degree than the actor; State need not prove accomplice committed first‑degree murder to convict accessory of first‑degree murder)
- State v. Richardson, 923 S.W.2d 301 (Mo. banc 1996) (instructional deviation not prejudicial where defendant’s deliberation was the critical element)
- State v. Williams, 411 S.W.3d 275 (Mo. App. S.D. 2013) (on‑the‑record waiver/no‑objection forecloses appellate review, including plain error)