No. WD 41627 | Mo. Ct. App. | Dec 12, 1989
This is an appeal from a bench trial on stipulated facts which resulted in a conviction and two year sentence, as a prior offender, for the class D felony of carrying a concealed weapon, § 571.030.1(1), RSMo 1986. The sole point concerns denial of a motion to suppress evidence and a post-arrest statement.
Kansas City police responded to an emergency call at 1:30 a.m. from a housing complex. Upon arriving, an officer saw the defendant run from behind a building the other way from the police, carrying a box which he was trying to conceal. The officer chased the defendant for about k of a mile and told him to stop. As the officer gained on the defendant, Brown threw away the box in which was later found a fully loaded highway patrolman’s 357 revolver. After being arrested, the box was opened. Brown was read his rights pertaining to self incrimination, then voluntarily gave a statement which he then refused to sign.
The thrust of the appeal seems to be a lack of probable cause for the arrest, thus negating any justifiable reason for opening the box. The defendant’s reliance on State v. Berry, 609 S.W.2d 948" court="Mo." date_filed="1980-12-15" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/state-v-berry-1623067?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="1623067">609 S.W.2d 948 (Mo. banc 1980), is misplaced. Just because the
A warrantless search was also lawful where the officer saw the suspect discard the evidence and the officer simply retrieves that evidence. State v. Brown, 762 S.W.2d 471" court="Mo. Ct. App." date_filed="1988-11-22" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/state-v-brown-1470739?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="1470739">762 S.W.2d 471, 475 (Mo.App.1988); State v. Berry, supra, at 952.
The defendant also looks to Michigan v. Chesternut, 486 U.S. 567" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1988-06-13" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/michigan-v-chesternut-112095?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="112095">486 U.S. 567, 108 S.Ct. 1975, 100 L.Ed.2d 565 (1988). Chestemut, though, involved a different set of facts and does not help the defendant as the police there followed a suspicious person for a long period and did not command him to halt nor did they act in an “aggressive manner” to block escape. Id. 108 S. Ct. 1975" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1988-06-13" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/michigan-v-chesternut-112095?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="112095">108 S.Ct. at 1980. The police action here was reasonable, and under the standard of review of a motion to suppress, State v. Trimble, 654 S.W.2d 245" court="Mo. Ct. App." date_filed="1983-06-08" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/state-v-trimble-1513965?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="1513965">654 S.W.2d 245, 254 (Mo.App.1983), proper.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.