jeffrey weinhaus lf vol ii

8/10/2019 Jeffrey Weinhaus LF Vol II

1/79

IN

THE

MISSOURI

COURT

OF APPEALS

EASTERN

DISTRICT

STATE

OF

MISSOURI.

Respondent,

vs

No

ED100807

JEFFREY R. WEINHAUS,

Appellant.

LEGAL

FILE

Volume

II

AMY M. BARTHOLOW

Office of

State

Public Defender

10 00 W. Nifong

Boulevard, Bldg.

7,

Ste. 100

Columbia, Missouri

65203

573 882-9855

Attorney for

Appellant

SHAUN

MACKELPRANG

Office

of

the

Attorney

General

P.O. Box 899

Jefferson

City,

Missouri 651 2

573

751-3321

Attorney

for

Respondent


2/79

INDEX

VOLUME

Page s

R

NK

LIN

COUNTY

SE

NO 12AB CR 24 9 O1:

DOCKET

SHEETS

1 1 9

INDICTMENT

20 22

SUBSTITUTE INFORMATION

IN LIEU

OF INDICTMENT

23-25

DEFENDANTS

REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY

26-29

DEFENDANTS

MOTION

FOR

BILL OF

PARTICULARS

30-32

PRO

SE

MOTION

TO

DISMISS

33 35

DEFENDANTS MOTION

TO QUASH

INDICTMENT

36-48

DEFENDANTS MOTION

TO

SEVER

THE CHARGES

49 52

DEFENDANTS MOTION

IN LIMINE

/

MOTION

TO

EXCLUDE

53 57

DEFENDANTS

VERIFIED

ANNOUNCEMENT

OF

READY AND

MOTION

FOR

SPEEDY TRIAL

8 59

DEFENDANTS

SECOND

MOTION

TO SEVER

OFFENSES

60 65

DEFENDANTS

AMENDED

SECOND

MOTION

TO

SEVER

OFFENSES

66 71

DEFENDANTS MOTION

TO

DISMISS

THE

CHARGE OF TAMPERING

WITH

JUDICIAL OFFICER

FOR

DEFECT

IN THE INSTITUTION

OF THE

PROSECUTION

72-106

DEFENDANTS

AMENDED

MOTION

TO DISMISS

THE

CHARGE

OF

TAMPERING

WITH

JUDICIAL

OFFICER FOR

DEFECT IN

THE

INSTITUTION OF

THE

PROSECUTION

1 7 14


3/79

DEFENDANTS

SECOND

MOTION

IN

CIMINE

141 143

STATES

MOTION

iN

LIM1NE

144

DEFENDANTS

OPPOSITION

TO

STATES

MOTION IN

LIMINE

145 147

STATES

MOTION

IN LIMINE

2

148

DEFENDANTS

OPPOSITION TO STATES

SECOND

MOTION

IN

LIMINE

149 15

VOLUME

Ii

DEFENDANTS

MOTION

FOR

JUDGMENT OF

ACQUITTAL

15

1 152

DEFENDANTS

SECOND MOTION

FOR

JUDGMENT OF

ACQUITTAL

153 156

DEFENDANTS

SUPPLEMENTAL

SUGGESTIONS

OF

LAW

IN

SUPPORT

OF

EACH OF HIS ORIGINAL RENEWED

SECOND

MOTIONS

FOR

JUDGMENT

OF

ACQUITTAL

157 162

JURY

INSTRUCTIONS

163 192

JURYS QUESTIONS

193 194

VERDICTS

195 2

SENTENCING

VERDICTS

201 204

DEFENDANTS

MOTION

FOR NEW TRIAL

2 5 211

JUDGMENT

212 214

NOTICE OF

APPEAL

2 15 222

CLERKS

CERTIFICATION

223 225

CERTIFICATE

OF

SERVICE

226


4/79

F

IL

IN

IH

I

R U

II

O

t

RI

R

IRA

NK

I

IN

C

0CN

I

2

to

JU

D

I I

L

CIRCF

f

S1A

FI,

lb

MIS

SOU

RI

FAN

KL

jh bi

S FATE

OF MIS

SOU

RI.

ase

No . 2.

\B-C

R0

240Q

JEFFREy

R.

W

HNH

AL

S,

De

fend

ant.

1

EF

END

NT

S

MO ION FO

R

JUD

CM

EJT

O

A

CQI

1T

[AL

om

es

n

o

D

elhnd

ant

Je

ffre

y

R.

\

\einh

aus. h coun

sel

Il

uch A.

East

wood and

C

hrist

ophe

r

M. C

omb

s,

and

sta

tes

as his R

ule

2

7.07 M

oti

on

for Ju

dgm

ent o

f

A

cqu

ittal:

h

t te

h s fail

ed to m

ake

a

subm

issi

ble

case

fbr

all

of

the

elem

ent

s

hr

each otits

char

ges.

arid

th

eref

ore

the

Cou

rt

mu

s:

ent

er a judg

men

t of

a

cqui

ttal.

1

P

osse

ssion Of Con

trol

led

Su

bstan

ce

Ex

cep

t

35 Gr

ams Or Less O

f M

ariju

ana,

a

class

C

Fe

lony

,

RSMo

195.

202:

2.

la

mpe

ring

W

ith

Jud

icial

OfTicer,

a

class

C

F

elon

y.

RSM

o

.5o5

.084

;

3.

P

osse

ssio

n

OfU

p

To

35

Grar

n

Mari

juan

a,

a

C

lass

A

Mi

sdem

ean

or,

RSMo:

195,202:

4.

A

ssaul

tiAn

ernp

t

A

ssau

lt-

1

1G.

C

orr

Off, L

mrg

nc

Prsiml

Hwy

Wkr, t

:j j

y

W

rkr

.Cbl

e

Wr

kr

Or

P P O

ffer

1st D

egr,

a Cl

ass

A Fe

lon ,

R

SMo

565

.081

;

5.

A

rme

d

Crim

ina

l

A

ctio

n,

Felo

n Un

clas

sifie

d.

RSMo.

571.0 15:

6. Assault.Attempt

Ass

ault

11

0 o

rr

OfL

E

rnrgn

c

Pr

snnl

lw

Wkr

n

itv

\Vrk

r.CI

Ie

rkr Or P P

O

iler 1st

De

er, a

\

el

on\,

RNMo

56

U8

1

Arm

ed

C

rim

inat

\

ctio

n,

I

ek

ny Un

class

ified

,

RSM

o

01

8

Re

sistin

g

inte

rferi

ng

With

Arr

est For

A

F

elons

,

a

C

lass I)

Fe

lon\.

RS

Mo

:

75

150:

W

HE

REF

OR

E

i efe

ndan

t

Jeitie

R.

Wei

nhai

s pr

d\s ih

s ou

rt ente

r a

Ji.

DG\

1LN

I O

f

A

CQ

f II I

Al.

on

all

cou

nts, and

for suc

h ethe

r reli

ef

as is meet

iust

and

rea

son

able


5/79

Respectfully

Submitted.

Aitorneis

for

Defendani

iq

oL

Hugh

A.

Lastwood, Mill. 62058

7777

Bonhomine

A

enue.

Suite

160

St.

Louis.

Missouri 631 151Q41

heastwood

eastvoodlawstl corn

Tax

31417274473

Tel

314

727 5

Cell

314 8092343

s

cito

her

ionths

Christopher

M.

Combs. MBF

ui65512

4242 Laclede Ave., Unit

104

St.

Louis

MO

63108

combschrisl

grnail.con]

leT:

314

578 1465

Fax 314

531

1069

CFR Ill IC.\I

L

OF

SNRVICF

he

undersigned certifies

that

on

2 l s hc

served

this

document

on:

Robert

F. Parks, Ii

Franklin

County

Prosecuting

Attorne

S.

Church

St..

Room

204

Lnion, MO 63084

The

method s

of service:

by hand

cieii\

cry


6/79

ttii:

CIRUL

II

. )t

R

OR

lR.\\Kl

INC

Ut

N

ith

JI

DICL\l

IRCt

II

sI

UI

01

1ISSOt

RI

StAll

OFMISSOL RI,

)

)

Case

No .

12A8-CR02409-OI

JEFFREY

R.

WFINI

tAt

Defendant.

DEFENDANTS SECONI

MOTION

FOR Jfl GMEN1

OF . CQflTTA1

Comes now

Defendant

Jeffrey R.

Weinhaus.

by counsel

lugh

A.

Eastwood

and

Christopher

M.

Combs. and

states a his

second

motion

for

judgment of acquittal.

as

a

matter

of

law

pursuant to

Rule

27.07 c):

The

slate originally

brought

A

charge.. the Court

acquitted the Defendant

o/2

chargec

at

the clo.se

of

State v evidence, upon

De/knclani motion. The issue he ore

ihe

wart

here

i s

ii

heiher

the

2

drug

eomwtions /loni

controlled substance

morphine

tabletci

and

,niAdemeanor

marijuana

possession

should also

be subjeci

it..

acquittal as

a

mailer

at

law.

I.

Controlled

substance, no

active or

constructive

possession. Ihe

idence

shoved

that

Defendant

lived

in

the

house

with his

then

wife

and

teenage

son.

Ihe one

and

one-half

morphine

tablets were

found inside

a Camel

brand

snuff

box

in

a common

area

of the

basement

in

a

container

near

a

family

computer.

he

common area na.

not

locked

off

or

others

ise

secured

from

other

common areas

ol

the

house.

he

es

ident: also

hnsed

that

the teenage

sonc

bedroom

as

a4iacent

the common

area. Common

sense and

esperience

indicate

that teenage

boys

sometimes

do

nauahty

things in

the basements of

family

homeswhether

with izirls. or

with alcohol

and drugs.

here

was

no

other

esidence

that

l elendant

constructnely possessed

the

morphine

tablets,

let done

esen

knew

of

their

eitence.

I

her:

is no

et

idence that

he

wds es

er pnmiinat to

the

basement

7


7/79

on

th

e day of

the

sear

ch :

he

spo

ke

to

the

troo

pers

ou ts

ide

the

ho

me.

U

h

at he

m

ade a

hom

e

m

o

te

in

the

base

men

t

a

fen days

b

efor

e

is

irrele

an

t.

Re

ce nt a

utho

rity

del

:ats

c

onstr

ucti

e

poss

essio

n o

f

t

he

m

orp

hin e

, and

af li

rms

tha

t

hsso

un

ca

nno

t

supp

ort

L)

efen

dant

s

co

n

icti

on

fo

r

p

osse

ssion

of

the

m

orph

ine

tab le

ts.

St

ate

v

oli t

te No

. SD

3146

9 1 eb.

25.2

013

D

efe

ndan

t

h

ad sma

ll am o

un t

o

f

ma

rijua

na

in

h

is b ed

room

.

bu

t

a

cqui

tted o

t

po

sses

sion

of

dulTel b

ag o nt

ini n

g

t

hree

b

ricks

of m

ariju

ana

.

ihi

h

sas

fo

und

in

ga ra

ge of jo

intly

-con

tro ll

ed

pr

em i

ses):

c

e a

lso

St

ate

v

Ilend

rix, S.W

.3d

9.83 Mo

.Ap p

.20O

2) D

efe

ndan

t

d

espi

te

hai

ing a

crac

k

p

ipe

on her

per

son. acq

uitte

d

o

f tra

ffick

ing

cha

rge

f

or

37

roc

ks o

f coca

ine

ba

se

hidd

en

a

sec

ond b ed

room

of he

r ho

me

i

n

s

hich she

ias a

co-h

abit

an t):

St

ate

lin

t

Dl

S

iS .3

d

59.

63

M

oSp

p.20

00

De

knd

ant kn

es

o

f me

th

in

kit

chen iceb

ox h

ut

th

at

kn o

l

edge

d

id

not

in

dica

te co

ntro

l

gite

iceb

ox s s

in co

mm

on area of

i

oint

ly

co

ntro

lled

prem

ises

).

2.

Marijuana,

no active

or

constructive

possession .

Sgt. Folsom said based on his

tr

ainin

g

th

at

h

e

sm

elle

d m

arij

uana

o

n

De

fen d

ant

s per

son. an

d t

ha t De

fend

ant

ap

pear

ed

und

er

th

e in

fluen

ce

of

m

ariju

ana.

But

.

th

ere s

n

o mar

ijuan

a

on hi

s

pers

on .

Furth

er .

th

e troo

pe rs se

ized se

aled

ma ri

juan

a

in t

he base

men

t,

but

not

a

pip

e.

b

ong

.

or

o

ther f

orm

o

f

dru

g-de

liver

y d

ci

ice

for the m ar

ijua

na . l

i n

if Sg

t Fols

oni is c

orr ec

t

t

ha t

l

)efen

dan

t

s u

nder

t

he

inf l

uenc

e, th

at

fa

ct does not

prow

up

possessio n.

for th e same

re sons

d

escri

bed

as to t

he m

orph

ine

Sec P

etti

te;

liend

rix: lie

u.

urth

er, De

fend

an t ai

tem p

ted in

cio

ss exa

min

ation

of

S

gt.

S

mi t

h

to

i

ntro

duce hi

s

po

lice

r

epor

t

abo

ut

a tex

t nle age

re

late

d t

c

e

inha

us

the

Cou

rt

su

stain

ed

a

n

ob

jecti

on by

the

Sta

te.

ii

h

ich Defe

nda

nt

ar

gues

s p

reju

dic ia

l

e

rror

req u

iring

a

tria

l).

Iher

e s

s ci

ide

nce

in

a

poli

ce repo

rt iiritw

n bs

S

gt.

P

.L . Smi

th t

ha t

th

ere is

as

a


8/79

text

lrom

a

c

\\

einhaus

i

Defendants

on to

Defendant concernin

a eed

plant.

Common

sense

and

expericn

e

indicate that

eed

plant i

a

street

name man uana

Sat.

Smith ne

en

passed this nflrmatiun

n

tu Sat.

isnln

on p

\

leniens.

hJt

le\t

messace

coes

to

Defendant

lack

cult

tar possession

at

the

marijuana

taunu

m

his

basement.

and

counsel further against

the

fact of Defendants

possession.

\k I IERLI OR Defendant

.Jeffre

R.

\\einhaus

pra

s this

Court set

aside

the

jury erdict

of guilt

and enter

a

directed

verdict

for judgment of

acquittal

on

each the

Controlled

Substance possession feIon conviction, and

2)

Marijuana

possession

m

isdeineanor

cons iction.

a nd fo r

such

other relief

as

is

meet,

ust and

reasonable.

Respectfu1I

submitted.

\ttornes for

Defendant

s flugh J. J2astiiood

lugh

A.

Eastvood.

MB :

a

62058

7777

Bonhomme Avenue.

Suite

16i

St.

Louis

Missouri

63

1051941

heastwood(fi

cast\ oodlastI.com

Fax

(314)7274473

id

(314)7273533

Cell

(314)

809 2343

j,istoIe,

M Combs

Christopher

M.

Combs. MB

ff655

2

1242

Laclede \e

ni

104

St

I

outs, MO

63108

eomhschnis

a gmai

l eom

Tel.

578

465

lax.

H4S31

1069

Cl

RI l l

All UI

SI

R\

IC

he

undersigned

eerti

fle

that

on

U

9

20

3

the

sen

ed

tht

is

da

ument

Robert I..

Parks. II

rank

in

County

Prosee

u ii na \ttorre\

5 5,

Church St..

Room

204

fliOfl, \1O

63084


9/79

ljj h aspsoo

he

method s

ol

sen 1w:

Missouri ourts c-filing system


10/79

l\ ilL CIRCI

C01

R

FOR FR\\KI

1\

O

\ V

Uth

DICI\l

iRC

\T[

01

\lISSOL

RI

S

F.\

FL 1 \IISSOCRI.

Cae

\

\ 13-C

RU

WO-

JEFFREY

R \VIT\J

lA

S.

Defendant.

jJEFEND:NTS

SI

PP1J:MENTL.

SUc ;ESIIONS

01

1W

IN

SE

IPORT

OF

EACh 01

IllS

ORIGlNAl.

RENE EJ SF ONI MOTIONS

FOR

Ji DCMFNT

OF

\ QIITI\I .

Comes

no

Dehndant

Jeffi

R.

\\einhaus.

b\ coum,eI Iueh

\.

ast\\

oud and

Christopher

VI. Combs. and

stales as

his supplemental sugestions

of

Ia\\ in support of

each

of

his

original. rene

ed

and second

motions

for

judgment of

acquittaL

timeI

filed

as a matter

of

lass

pursuant

to

Rule 7M7 c :

Procedural

Posture

Fhe

State

originally

brought

eight charges.

he Court

acquitted Defendant

of

t\so

charges

at

the

close

of States

evidence,

upon Delndants

original motion for

judgment

of

acquittal.

Defendant

reness

ed his

mot an

at

the close of

Defendant

s es idence

Fhe

jury

convicted

on

ffiur

outs

and

found

ot

m i

lt\

on

attempted

assault and

armed

ci

iminal

action

as

to Cpl. Mertens.

Post

trial,

Defendant

timeR

t

led

a

second

motion

for udgment

of

acqLnttal

sso issues

are

iI \\

beflre

the

Court:

I

Whether

the

State

produced sufficient

C\

idence

of

Defendants

intent

to assault Sgt.

oRom.

in that

the act alleoed

does

not Constitute

\uhtantIaI

step

tow

ard frst-degree itteinpted

assaLilt.

and

whether the

State produced

suflicient

es idence

of

DcRmdant

s

possession

on the two

drue cons

ictions

h.Hou\

control led


11/79

substance

morphine

tablets and rn

sderneanor

mart

juana

possession.

hese suggesui1s

further

address

the first issue.

as th e

seconu iSSue

has

already

been

briefed in DefendanCs second

motion

for

judgment of acquittal.

l iscussion

Insufficient

evidence

of intent

to

assault

Sgt.

Folsom. in

that

the

act

alleged

does not

constitute a substantial step

toward

first-degree

attempted assault.

Thejury convicted

Defendant

of

a crime that the Defendant

could

not

ha e

committed.

in

that

the

facts alleged in

the Substitute Information and

Verdict

Director

d o n ot

lbrm the elements

for attempt under

the

statute.

This

is

a rare ease s here Defendanfs

cons iction

is

thus

a legal

impossibility based

on

the underlying

facts . and there

is

insufficient

idence

to

support

the

coniction.

Stale

it

Summers,

43

S.W.3d

323

M o

\pp.W.I)..

2001).

1rying

to draw a

weapon

to

shoot

at

Sgt.

FoIsom

is

no t

a

fact

that

legally

supports

first-degree

attempted

assault

on

law

enforcement under RSMo. 565.081. First-degree assault requires tha t the

deli?ndant

intended

to

cause death or serious

physical injury to

a

law

enforcement

officer.

Fhher

v

Stale,

359 S.W.3d

113.

121 Mo. App .. 2011: MM CR

3d 319.32.

Note

that the anal

sis

here is not

that

of,

for

example.

third-degree

assault where

an

officer is

pu t in

reasonable apprehension

of

immediate

physical

injury.

t

RSMo.

575.083:

MM-CR

3d 319.34. lb show

intent, the State

must prove

up

idence

of

attempt:

that is. a substantial

step

toward

completion of

the assault.

which

merely

pulling

a

gun ou t from

a

holster

cannot be. lo

hold

otherwise is

plain

error

tinder

ou r

Missoun Supreme ourCs precedent.

and

manifest

injustice would

result.

See.

e

g..

Slate

it

ReeL,

167

S

V

3d

767

\Io.

2005)

and

cases

dkcussed

below.

he

disputed

idence. in

the

best

light

to

the

tate.

was

that

I)efendant

withdrew

a

pistol

from

an

opencarry

holster

on

his belt ,

and

2)

stated

o re

going to

has:

to

shoot

me

l

1


12/79

I

mane

Defendant does not concede

either

facts Irguendo

host e er.

those

ji

Ibets

are legally

insufficient

e

idence

of

intent

to a s au lt.

ot of

intent

to

attempt

to

assault.

Sgt

ulsom

under

the

o mgI>

attempts

to

cause

serio

t

ph)

i

l

harm language of KS\Io.

565.081 Ic hold

that

these

facts

are sufficient

ould turn

c

cry

threat vith

a

deadly

e

po

n

into

a

substantial

step

ard the

commission

of

first-degree

assault

on a

l

i

enforcement officer.

Judge

.inibaugh.

riling

for

ou r

Missouri Supreme

ourt

en

h n

has

instructed u othe

n

ise

intent I

dn

attempt

to cause

serious

physical

in u ry cannot

be inferred

from

merely negligently endangering

a

person or property of another.

hoss

eer great

the danger

or

extreme

the negligence.

t te

reL

Verweire

Muo

n 211

S

ik

.3d

89

o . bane

2006):

JIliaIen

49

S.W.3d

at

187

n. 5

citing

t Perkins

Criminal

Law

573-74

Cd ed.l969fl.

One

may

infer

intent

from

tI c

l)e ndants

beha

tar

before.

durinsz and

alter

the

act.

Verweire

at

92:

SWift

lllneman

4

S.W.3d

924.927-28

Mo .

bane 1999).

flie

undisputed

ci

idence

on

the watch .ideo shoi s

L)efendant

drii

ing

to the gas station stating that he beliei

ed

his

computers ii

ert

to be returned

to

him,

and the troopers

admitted

that they

had

lied

to

Defendant and created

a

ruse

in

the

story

about

the

computers.

A

11cr

l)efendant

s

t

hdra

i

al ol

his gun which

he

does

not concede

except

for argument). Defendant iias

shot

and incapacitated.

kt no time

did

Defendant

attempt

tc fire

the

iieapon

or

pull the

trigger, the

only ei idence

the

State

has of

intent

is thc

troopers

dsputed

and inconsistent

testimony that Defendant tsithdrei

his

gun

and stated Youre

going

to

ha i

e

to

shoot me

man. 1)efendant

does t

conceic

that

lie

made

that statement

or

that

such

a tatcmcnt

is

a

threat. Bu t ei

en

ii this

ourt find. that

that

statement

is

a

threat,

a mere

threat

ith

the abilits

to

tarn ou t

that

threat

does

not necess irily

constitute

an attempt

to

commit a crime.

I

7erweire. 211

S.W .3d

at

92-93.

Instead.

there

must

be


13/79

strongly corroborating

c

idence that

it was the

defendants

conscious

object to

carry

ut the

threat

Id . I lere there is

none.

Under

these circumstances.

.)efendant

did not hate the

intent

h

cause serioLh phy

cical

injury,

but a t

most merely threatened

to

di)

so.

here

is

no in idence

l elndant

e er pulled

the

trigger.

Ihis

is

not

a

case like

those in

which

the defendant

w s

on icted because

hc

would

hase

iniured

the

ictim

bu t

for

the

malfunctioning

of

his weapon

or

the

intenention

of

law

enforcement.

See. eg

State v Unverzagc,

721

S.W.2d

786. 788 Mo.

pp.l

986) e4

idenee

showing

defendant

pointed

an unlo

ded re ol

er.

belies

ing

it to

be loaded,

at

another

person

four

feet away and pulled

the

trigger

two or

three times was sufficient

to

show

intent to

cause

serious

physical injury): In re

R

N.

687 S.W.2d

655.

656

o.App.1985

evidence

showing

that

defendant entered

a hotel carrying a

lug wrench

and

announced

that

he

as

there

to

assault

the

manager

but

wa s

stopped

by

a

police

officer

as sufficient to

show

intent

to

cause serious

physical

injury). No r

is

this

a

ease

in

which the defendant attempted to cause serious physical

injury but

only minor

injury

resulted from

his

actions.

See.

e.g.,

State

JJhite,

798

.2d

694.

697

Mo.

banc

1990)

evidence

showing

that defbndant

threw the ictim

to

the

floor,

told

the

victim

to shut up or I

will

stab you

and

cut the vic tim without

causing

serious

physit l injun

was

sufficient

to

show

intent

to

cau e serious

physical

injury). Further.

eten

in cases where

a

Defendant wields

a

weapon

and

makes a threat

which

here Defendant

did

not

do).

at

most

only

second-degree

or third-degree

attenpted

assault

can be thund.

Statc

v

Dublo,

\o

l

6202

O.Io.

kpp.. 2007

Spinden.

conturring

defendant

wielding

a deadly

weapon

and

makint

a

threat

may

be

Ihund

guilty

of as.a

ilt

in

the

second

degree or

third

degree

depending

upon the

specific

circumstances

4


14/79

s

such

there

is

insuflicient

idence

ol

intent,

and

Defendants

eon

iction flr

his

attempted

assault on

Sgt.

I

olsom must

be

reersed

and

Defendant

acquitted

on

each

of

that

charge

and thus

also

of armed criminal

action.

In

the

altematis

e

to

acquitta

l efendant

es

that the Court instead

remand

for

a

new

trial

only

on a

lesser-int.luded

chaft: of third-degree

attempted

assault

on

law enforcement.

RSNIo.

565.083.

a

Class

misdemeanor.

Armed

Criminal ctionbarred

by Double

Jeopardy

Defendant

also

suggests that

in

any eent

the armed

criminal

action cun iclion iol tes

his rights

under

the

Double

Jeoparch

Clause of the

Fifth

Amendment. U.S.

Const..

while

conceding

that

our appellate

courts

have

no t

addressed

this

precise

issue

since the

armed

criminal

action

cons

iction

was

related to

the attempted

assault

cent

iction

as to

Sgt. Folsom.

See.

g..

v.

Slate

.3d 611

Mo.

2006 : bin

we

State

Peters,

855

.2d

145

Nb..

1993;

Robertson.

CJ..

dissenting .

WHEREFORI:

Defendant

JetTre3

R.

Weinhaus

pra3s this

Court

set aside

the

jury

terdiet

of

guilt

and

enter

a

directed

verdict ibrjudgmern

of

acquittal

on

each

the

I assault

coniction

as

to Sgt . Folsom

2 armed criminal

action

as

to

Sgt. Folsom.

3

Controlled

Substance

possession

felony conviction,

and

.1;

Marijuana

possession

misdemeanor

cons

iction. and

w

such

other relief

as

is

meet

just and

reasonable.

Respectfully

submitted.

\ttimeys

for

Defendant

s

jJyghjEacnrvod

ugh

A.

Eastwood.

MBF

462058

7777

Bonhomme

Menue.

Suite

I6 i3

St. Louis.

Missouri

63

105-1941

heastwood

a

easttt

oodlawstl.com

Fax

U

4 727

473

4


15/79

IJ 314

727

3533

li

314 8092343

Christopher

M Combs. MI3L

4655

12

4242

Laclede Ave.. Unit 1 4

St

ouis

MO 63

1 8

comhschris

agmail.com

Tel:

314

57 8 1465

Lax: 314

531 1 69

CLRTIFICATI/

1:

SLRV IC E

The undersigned

certifies that

on

11/15/2013 s he

served

this document

on :

Robert 1

Parks,

Franklin

County

Prosecuting

Attorney

15

S

Church

St Room

204

Union,

Mo 63084

s ih 1Iiiwood

The method s 1

service:

Missouri courts c-tiling

syst m

6


16/79

Todays

trial

fiar which

vo hake

been

called for

jury

service

is

a

criminal cace Ihe

State

of Missouri

has chareed

that the defendant

Jeffrc

R

\Veinhaus has committed

the

offenes

of

possessing

a

controlled

substance tampering

with a judicial

ollicer

possessing

marijuana

assault

of

a l enforcement

officer

armed criminal action

assault

of

a enforcement

otlicer

armed criminal

action

and

resisting

arrest Ihe

dehndant has

pleaded

not

guilty

to the charges

Thus

there are

issues of

fact

that

[nust

he

decided by

a

jury subject

to

instructions concerning

the

law

that the

Court

will give

to

the

jury

he

jury

is obligated

to

follow those instructions

A trial of a criminal case begins

with the

selection

ofa

jury

of

qualified and impartial

people In order

to obtain

such a iury

all

of

you

have been

summoned

as

prospective

jurors

From

your number ajury will

be selected

to

hear the

case

It

is

necessary

that

you

be

asked

various

questions Your

answers

will assist the Court

in

determining

whether

it should

excuse

you

from

serving in

this

case

and will assist

the attorneys

in

making their selection of

those

who

will

hear

the

case

lhus

the

questions

that

will he

asked

of

you are

not meant

to

into tour

personal

affairs

Rather they

are

a

necessary

part

of

the

process

of

selecting

alur

Since

this is

an

important

dart of

the

trial

you a re required

to be sworn

heftre questions

are

asked Please rise

now

and be

sworn to

answer

questions

ihe

panel

will he

ssom

Please listen

carefully

t o a ll

questions

ake

your

time

in

ansering questions Some

of

the

questions

may

require

ou to tecall

experiences

during

your entire

lilbtime

Iheretore search

your

memor before anssering

it

you

do

no t

understand

the question

raise

sour

hand

and

say

so

If later

on

during the

examination

you

remember

something

that

you failed to ansser

before or

that

would

modify

an

answer

you

gase

before

raise

our

hand and

ou sill

he

asked


17/79

about

it our

answers

must

not

nly

be truthful

bu t t must

he

lull nd

complete It

our

answer

to any of thesc questions m\olses matters

that

are

personal

or prkate y ou may

so

indicate

and you

will

he given an

opportunity

to

state

your answer

at

the bench

The

tri l

of

a

lawsuit

invokes

considerable

time and effort

and the parties

are entitled to

have

their

rights

finalk

determined

lhe

lailure

on your

part

fully

and

truthfully

to

answer

questions

during

this stage

of the

rial

could force

the

p rties

to have

to

retr

the l wsuit

at some

future

date

fhe

Court will now

read

to

you

an

instruction

on the

law applicable to all

criminal

cases

Phe

charge

of

ny

offense

is

not

evidence

and

it

creates

no

inference that

any

offense

was

committed

or

that

the defendant is guilty olan

offense

The

defendant

is

presumed to be

innocent

unless

and unti l

during your

deliberations

upon your

verdict

you f ind

him

guilty

This

presumption of

innocence

places upon

the

State

the

burden

of

proving

beyond a reasonable

doubt th t the defendant is guilty

A reasonable

doubt

is a

doubt

b sed

upon reason and common

sense

afier

carelul and

imp rti l consideration

of

all the idence

in

t he case

Proof

beyond a

reasonable doubt is

proof

th t le ves you firmly

convinced of the

defendants

guilt

The

law does

no t

require

proof

th t overcomes

every possible

doubt

If

after

your

consideration of

all

the

evidence

you are

firmly

convinced that the

defendant is guilty

of

the

crimes charged

you

will

find

him

guilty If you are

not

so

convinced you must

give him

the

benefit

of the

doubt

nd find him

lot guil ty

Is there any

of

you

who it selected

as

a

juror

could not ftr

any

reason

follow

that

instruction?

If

so would

you

please

r ise your

hand

It is your duty

to

follow the

law

as

the

Court gises

it

to

you

iii

the

instructions even


18/79

t

houg

h

you

may d

isag

ree with

t \re

the

re

a

ny

of

yo

u

who

wo

uld no

t

be

wi

llin t

o fol

low

all

instr

uctio

ns

t

h t

th

ourt

wi

ll i

to the

u

If

so

wou

ld

ou pleas

e

ra

ise

your hand

.

Int

rodu

ce

th

atto

rney

s and

sk

such

add

ition

al

qu

estio

ns as

th

e

Co

urt

de

ems

a

ppro

priat

e.

The

pros

ecuto

r wi ll q

ues

tin

li

rst n

d then

cou

nsel fo r th d

e1n

dant wi

ll qu

estio

n

you

C

oun

sel for the s

tate m

y proc

eed

.

MAI

C

R

3

rd

2

Sub

mitt

ed

th S

tate


19/79

I. A

l

I

HF

FI

RST RF

CFS

S

OR

A

I JO

RNM

EN

It

is

the

o

urts

d

uty to

in

stru

ct

.ou

n

ow upon

a

m

tt r ab

out

which

you wil]

he

reminded

at

each r

eces

s or

a

djou

rnm

ent

of

ur nil

this

se

is

gi

ven

to

ou

10

Jec

ide.

.ou

must

no t

dis

cuss

n

subje

ct con

nect

ed w t m

the

trial am

ong

ou

rseR

es.

or

t

or

or

cxpresc

an\

op n

on

abou

t

it and un

til

you

are

disc

harg

ed

as

jur

ors,

you

mu

st not talk

wit

h

o

ther

s

abou

t

the

case

or

permit the

m

to

disc

uss

it

with you

or in

you

r

hea

ring

.

You

sho

uld not

e-m

ail,

text hiug. in

stan

t

me

ssag

e

or

use any

oth

er fo

rm

ol .omr

nun

icati

on rega

rdin

g

the cas

e or

a

nyon

e

in

oRe

d

in

the

case until

the

t rial has

end

ed

and a

h ve

been

d

ischa

rged

as

a juror.

hi

s impo

rtan

t

that

your

decis

ion be ba

sed only

on the

ev

iden

ce

pr

esen

ted

to

you in

the

pr

ocee

ding

s

in

the cou

rtro

om.

You

s

houl

d not do

am

r

esea

rch or

in

vesti

gatio

n

on your o

wn r

egar

ding

any

ma

ter

in

volv

ed

in

this case.

Fo r

exa

mple

,

y

ou sh

ould not

co

nsu

lt

hoo

ks, dic

tiona

ries

,

the

Int

erne

t or

talk

to

per

son you

cons

ider kno

wled

geab

le.

You

s

houl

d

not

read vi w or

l

isten

to am

new

spap

er,

radio

e

lectr

onic

co

mm

unic

ation

s

from

the

Inte

rnet or

tele

visi

on

rep

ort

o

f the

trial.

The

bailiff

and other

ofticers

of

the

Court

are not

permitted

to

talk

to

yo u

about

any

su

bject

conn

ecte

d

with the

triaL

a

nd you are

not

perm

itte

d

to

talk to them a

bout it.

Ihe

atto

rney

s

re

prese

ntin

g

the

sta

te and the

de

fend

ant

re

und

er

a

duty no t

to do

anyth

ing

that

may eve

n seem

impr

oper

.

Tl,er

cfor

e.

t

re

cess

es

and

a

djou

rnme

nts

they

will

avoid

saying

an

ythin

g

to the

jur

y

c

cept

.

pe

rham

.

som

eth

ing

like

iu

od

m

orn

ing

or

Goo

d afte

rnoo

n.

in

d

oing that they

do

not

m

ean to

be u

nfrie

ndly

,

but

arc

si

mply

doin

g their

b

est

to

avoid

e

en an

ap

pea

ranc

e,

tha

t mig

ht

be

m

isun

ders

tood

.

that

they

or

you

are

do

ing an

ythin

g

Improper

Th

e s m e

a

pplie

s

to

itn

csse

s

and

to the d

efen

dant Ihcy h

ave been or

will he

ris

truc

ted

to

avo

id

all

cont

acts

ith

the ju

r

eve

n

to

talk

about

ma

tters wholly

u

nrela

ted

to

the

case

MM

-CR 3rd

3

00.0

4

Sub

mitt

ed

by

the

Sta

te


20/79

2

Al SUBShQLLJT

RI

CLSSES OR

ADJO R\\li

is

fhe

Court

again

reminds

ou of\hat ou

were

told at the first

recess

of

the

Court

nfl

you

retire to consider

our verdict

ou must

not

discuss

this case

among

yourselves

or with

others

or permit anyone

to

discuss

it

in your hearing

You

should not

form

or

x r ss an y

opinion

about

the case until

it is

finally given to

you

to

decide

Do not

do

any research

or

investigation on your

own about

any

matter

regarding this

case

or

anyone

ins olsed \ ith

the

trial

Do

no t

communicate with others

about the case

b

any

means

Do nut read

view ci listen

to

any

newspaper

radio

electronic

communication

from the Internet

or

television

report

of

the

trial

MAT CR

rd

300 04

Submitted by the Stale


21/79

f

RE

CES

S F

T R

FIRS

I

S

i GE

OF

1311URCATEI

IR

IAI

Until

Y U reti

re

to

c

ons

ider ou

r

v

erdic

t

as to

p

umsh

men

t.

you

m

ust not

dis

cuss t his se

among

yo

urse

hes or t

ot

hers

or

perm

it

a

n\on

e

to

d

icus

s it in

ou

r hear

ing l

o

nut

do

a

n\

research or

in

vest

igati

on

on

your

about

a

n\

m

atte

r

re

gard

ing

this c

ase or

anx

one

m

oi

with the trial

.

I

o

not

co

mm

unic

ate wit

h oth

ers

a

bou

t

th

e

se

by

any

m

eans

.

Do

not

read

i

ev

or listen to

any

new

spa

per r

adio

ele

ctro

nic com

mun

icati

on

from the

Int

erne

t

or

tel

evis

ion

report

of

the

trial

M

AEC

R

rd

3

00.0

4

S

ubm

itted

by

the Sta

te


22/79

his

case

wi

ll

p

roce

ed

in

t

he

fo

llow

ing

o

rde r

F

irst

t

he

Cou

rt

will

rea

d to

\ou

t\\o

in

struc

tion

s

con

cern

ing th

e l

aw

app

licab

le to

th is

cas

e an

d

t

trial

xt

t

he a

ttorn

e for

the s

tate m

ust

mak

e an

op

enin

g sta

teme

nt

Ou

tlinin

g

wh

at

hc

expe

cts th

e stat

s

e\ide

nce w

ill he

lh

e att

orne

\

r the

de

fend

ant

n

ot

r

equi

red

to

mak

e

a

n

open

ing

s

tatem

ent

the

n o

r

at an

y o

ther t

ime.

lo s

ci

he

ch

oose

s to

d

o so.

he

m

a\ ma

ke

a

n

o

peni

ng

s

tatem

ent

af

ter t

hat of t

he

st

ate

or he ni

res

ere

his

op

ening

sta

tem

ent

un t

il the

concusion

of

the

slates

evidence

Evi

denc

e wil

l

th

en he

intro

duc

ed.

A

t the

co

nclu

sion

of

all of

the

ide

nce

fu

rthe

r instr

ucti

ons

in w

ritin

g

conc

erni

ng

the

law

will be

read

to

you

b

y the C

our t

alte

r wh

ich

the

att

orne

ys

may

m

ake

th

eir

argu

ment

s

u

w

ill

the n

be

gi

ven th

e

wri

tten

ins

truc

tions o

f

the

Co

urt

t

o

t

ake

with

you

to

y

our

jury ro

om

Y

ou

wil

l

g

o

to

that

ro

om

sel

ect

a

fo

repe

rson

. de

libe

rate

and

arriv

e

a

t

o

ur verd

ict.

If

you

fin

d

the

defe

ndan

t

gui

lt

i

n this

firs

t

st

age of

th

e tri

al

a

seco

nd

s

tage

o

f

t

he t

ria l

w

ill

be hel

d

I uri

ng

the

se

con

d stage

.

addi

tion

al

inst

ruct

ions

will

he

r

ead to

su

u b

the cou

rt

add

ition

al

e

vide

nce

may

be

pre

sent

ed.

and

the

a

ttorn

ess

make thei

r

arg

ume

nts a

s to

puni

shm

ent.

W

ith

the

a

dditi

onal

i

nstru

ctio

ns of

the

co

urt

you

will

r

eturn

t

o the

ju

ry

r

oom

del

ibera

te

a

nd

de

term

ine

th

e p

un.s

hrne

nt to

he asse

ssed.

Som

etim

es

the

re are

d

ela s or

c

onfb

ence

s

ou

t

o

f yo

ur

hear

ing wi

th

the

a

uoin

e\

abou

t

m

atter

s o

f

law

.

l

heI

e

ar

e

good

r

uo

n

f

or th

ese

dela

y

an

d

con

fere

nces

h

e o

ur:

c

nm t

de ni

that

ou

will

he

p

atien

t

a

nd

und

eist

andi

ng.

W

e wi

ll h

rec

esse

s

fro

m

time

t

o

time


23/79

he

following o

insiruetiois

of i r

br

our guidance

in

this ease

Uhe

to ci

them

along

with other

instructions r:11nc read

to

ou at the close

01 all

the

e

idence

ili

he

handed

to you

at

that

t m

to

take

our

ur ruom

NL\1CR 3rd

3 6

Submitted

h

the State


24/79

lSiR

[C

lON \O

T

hese who p

artic

ipate

in

jur

tri

l

mus

t

do

so m ac

cord

ance \\

ith e

stahi

tshe

d

r

u es

fh

is

is t

rue of

the

p

artie

s

the

witn

esse

s th

e l

awy

ers

an

d th

e

ju

dge

It

is

c

qual

l

true

of

ju

rors It

is th

e

Cou

rts

du

ty

to e

nforc

e th

ose rules an

d to i

nstr

uct

you

fl

th

e

a

ppli

cable

to

t

he c

ase

I

t

is

y

our

dut\

to

fo

llo t

he

l

aw

as th

e

Cou

rt

tive

s to

o

n

H

owev

er no sta

tem

ent

rulin

g

o

r r

ema

rk

tha

t

m

ay

mak

e d

urin

g

t

he

t

rial

is

in

tend

ed

to

ind

icat

e

my o

pinio

n of

wh

at

t

he lhc

ts

a

rc.

It

is y

our duty

t

o d

eterm

ine

the lh

cts

and

to de

term

ine

the

m

on

ly

f

rom th

e

evid

ence an

d th

e

re

ason

able

infe

renc

es

to be dra

wn f

rom

th

e

e

vide

nce Y

our

decision

must

be

b

ased

only

on

the

evi

denc

e pres

ente

d to

you

in

th

e

pro

ceed

ings

in this

co

urtro

om

a

nd yo

u

ma y

not

con

duct

y

ou r

ow

n

re

searc

h or in

estig

alio

n

int

o

an

\

th

e

issu

es

in

this

c

ase .

I

n you

r d

eter

mina

tion

of

the

facts

yo

u

alo

ne m

ust d

ecid

e

upon

the be

liev

abili

ty of

the

wi

tness

es

and the

we

ight

an

d

v

alue

of th

e

e

iden

ce

In

d

eter

mini

ng

the belie

vabi

lity

o

f

a

w

itnes

s an

d t

he

w

eigh

t

t

o

he

giv

en t

o

te

stim

ony

of

th

e

w

itnes

s

y

ou

m

ay

take

in to

consideration

the

witness

manner

while testifying:

the

ability

and

op

port

unity

of t

he w

itnes

s

to obs

erve

and

rem

em

ber

an

m

att

er

abou

t

wh

ich

te

stim

on\

is g

i

e

n;

a

ny

inte

rest bia

s

o

r pre

judi

ce

th

e

wi

tness

ma

y

hav

e; th

e

r

easo

nabl

enes

s

of the

w

itne

ss

tes

timo

ny

con

side

red

in

the li

gh t o

f

al

l o

f th

e evid

enc

e

in

the

cas

e;

an

d

any

othe

r

ma

tter

that

has

a

te

nden

cy

in

reaso

n to

p

rove or

disp

rove th

e tr

uthfu

lnes

s o

f th

e

tes

tim o

ny

of

the

wi

tness

.

Fait

hful

per

form

ance

b

y

you

of

your

dutie

s a

s juro

rs is vit

al

to

th

e

a

dmin

istra

tion

of

j

ustic

e.

You s

houl

d

p

erfo

rm yo

ui d

utie

s ith

ou t preju

dice

or

fear

an

d soIe

I\

h

om

a fair

and

imp

artia

l

con

side

ratio

n

the

who

le

ea

se.

M

AI C

R 3r

d

3O

2M

l

Su

bm i

tted by

th

e

Sta

te


25/79

lSl

R

li

ON

O

Yo

u mu

st

no

t

as

sume

as

true

an

y

fi

ct

sole

k

b

eca

use it

is

inclu

ded

in

or sug

geste

d h\

a

qu

estio

n aske

d

a

witn

ess

A

q

ucs:

ion

not ev

iden

ce

and

ma

he

c

onsi

dere

d on

ly

as

uppI

ics

m

ean

ing to

the

an

swe

r

rom tim

e to

time

the atto

rney

s

m

ay

m

ake

ob

jecti

ons

lhe

v ha

ve

a

righ

t

to do

so

a

nd

are

on

ly doin

g

t

heir

d

uty

as

the

y

s

ee

ii

You

sh

ould

dra

w

no inl

ren

cc

from

the fac

t

tha

t

an

obj

ectio

n

h

as

been ma

de

If

the

court

sustains

an

ohec

non

to

a question

von

will

disregard

the

entire question

and

y

ou

shou

ld n

ot

spec

ulate

as to wh

at

the

answ

er

of th

e witn

ess

migh

t

hav

e b

een

T

he

s m

e

app

lies

to e

xhib

its o

fftre

d

h

ut exc

lude

d from

the ev

iden

ce

after a

n ob

jecti

on has b

een sus

taine

d

You

wil

l

also d

isre

gard

an

y

a

nsw

er

or

o

ther m

atte

r

wh

ich

the

Co

urt

dire

cts

you

n

ot

to

co

nsid

er

and

anyt

hing w

hich

the

Cou

rt

or

ders

stric

ken

1mm

the

r

ecor

d

The ope

ning

st

atem

ents

o

f

the

atto

rne

ys

a

re

n

ot

eide

nce Al

so yo

u m

ust no

t c

onsi

der as

e

vide

nce

a

ny state

men

t

o

r

re

mar

k o

r ar

gum

ent by

any

of

th

e atto

rney

s

a

ddre

ssed

to

a

noth

er

tto

rney

or

to

the d

efen

dant

or

to t

he

C

ourt

lowe

ver

th

e

a

ttorn

eys

m

ay en

ter in

to ag

reem

ents or

sti

pulat

ions

o

f

fac

t

The

se

a

gree

men

ts an

d stip

ulat

ions

beco

me

pa

rt

of

the e

vide

nce

a

nd are

to

be

c

onsi

dere

d b

y

yo

u

as

such

M

A1

CR

3rd

302

02

Sub

mitte

d b

y th

e Stat

e


26/79

i

ST

R

t

Uh

e

l w ap

plica

ble

to

th

is

s

e

i

s

st

ated

in t

hese

in

struc

tion

s

and

th

e

whi

h

the

Co

urt

r

e d

to y

ou

imm

edia

tely

aft

er

y

ou w

ere s

wor

n

a

s ju

rors

A

ll

of

the ins

truc

tions

il

be

g

iven

to

y

ou

to

tak

e

to

you

r

ju

ry ro

o

o

r u

se du

ring so

ur

delib

erat

ions

ou

mus

t

no

t

sing

le

u ce

rtain

i

nstru

ctio

ns

nd

d

isre

gard

oth

ers

or

qu

estio

n

the

si

sdor

n

o

f

a

ny

rule

o

f l

aw

The

C

our

t

d

oes n

ot

m

ean to

assu

me

a

s true

ny

f

t refe

rred

to

in

thes

e

in

struc

tion

s

h

ut

le

ves

it

to

y

ou to det

erm

ine

w

hat

the

fac

ts are

\ A

C

R

rd

O

O

3

S

ubm

itted

by t

he

Sta

te


27/79

ISTRUCT ON

NO

T

he

ch

arge

of any

o

lTe

nse is no

t ev

iden

ce

and

cre

tes

no

inf

eren

ce that

of

te

nse

w s

c

omm

itte

d

or

th at th

e

def

enda

nt

is

g

uilt

y

ol

n

ol

tens

e

Uh

e

de

fend

ant is

pre

sum

ed to h

e in

noc

ent

u

nles

s a

nd

un

til

duri

ng

you

r

d

elib

erati

ons

upon

y

our

v

erdic

t y

ou

f

ind

hi

m

gu i

lty

T

his

pr

esum

ptio

n

o

f

inno

cenc

e

plac

es u

pon

the

s

tate

t

he

bu r

den

of

p

rovi

ng

be

yond

a r

easo

nabl

e

do

ub t th

at t

he d

efen

dan

t

is

gu

ilty

A r

easo

nabl

e dou

bt i

s

a

dou

bt ba s

ed

u

pon

re

ason

and

comm

on

s

ense

af

ter ca

reful

a

nd

impa

rtial

c

onsid

erat

ion

of

all

th

e

evid

ence

in

the

c

ase

Pr

oof

beyo

nd

a

rea

sona

ble dou

bt

is

proo

f

that

le

aves

y

ou

f

irml y

con

vinc

ed

of the

def

enda

nts

guil

t The

law

do

es no

t req

uire

proo

f

that

ove

rcom

es ever

y po

ssib

le

d

oub

t f

a

fter

you

r

cons

ider

ation of

a

ll

th

e ev

iden

ce

you

are

firm

ly

co

nvin

ced

t

hat

the defe

ndan

t is

guilt

y

of

th

e

cri

mes

char

ged

yo

u

wi l

l

f

ind

hi

m gu ilt

y i

f yo

u are

no

t

so

con

vinc

edyo

u

mu s

t

g

ive him

th

e

bene

fit

of th

e

d

oubt

an d fin

d hi

m no

t

g

uilty

M

AlC

R

3rd

3

2

4

S

ubm

itted

by t

he S

tate


28/79

N

S

R

IC

JI

O

NN

O

Und

er

th

e

kr

a d

efend

ant

h

as

the

rig

ht

not

to

tis

til>

No

p

resu

mpti

on

of

g

uilt

maY

lie

m

js

j

an

d n

o in

fere

nce

o

f

a

n>

kind

n

he

dr

n

frn

:n

th

fa

n

th

at

th

e d

elend

ant

didnot tcstif>

2 U

nde

r

the

t

t

he w

ik

f a

de

fend

ant

has

th

e r

ight

not to

tes

nfS

No

inkr

ene

of

an

>

k

ind

ma

>

be

dr

awn fr

om

i

flict

th

t

the

w

ife

d

id

not

te

stify

M

MC

R

3

d

30

814

S

ubm

itted

by

the D

efen

dan

t


29/79

INST

RU

CTI

ON

NO

As

to Co

un t

i

i you

fi

nd

and be

lieve

from the

e

id

en

e bey

ond

a r

easo

nabl

e d

oub t

:

Fi

rst tha t

o

n or

abou

t

ugu

st

20

12

in

the

C

oun t

y

of

Fra

nkli

n

St a

te ofMi

ssou

ri

th

e

d

efen

dant

p

osse

ssed

m

orph

ine

a c

on tr

olled

su

bsta

nce

and

Sec

ond

th

at

de

n

d

nt w

as aw

are

of

its

pr

esen

ce

and

natu

re

th

en

y

ou

w

ill

find the

defendant

guilty under Count

of

possessing

a

controlled

substance

How

ever

un

less

you

fi

nd

an

d

be

lieve

from

the

evi

denc

e

beyo

nd

a

r

easo

nabl

e

doub

t

each

and

all

of these

pr

opo

sition

s

y

ou

mus

t

f

ind the

de

fend

ant

not

gu

ilty

o

f that

o

ffen

se

M

ICR

3r

d

325

02

Su b

mitt

ed

t

he S

tate


30/79

INSTRUCTION

NO

As

to C

oun

t if

yo

u find a

nd beli

eve f

rom

th

e

evid

ence

bey

ond

a rea

sona

ble

d

oubt

:

F

irst

th

at o

n

o

r abo

ut A

ugu

st

2

12

in

th

e Cou

nty of F

rank

lin

St

ate o

fMis

souri

t

he

de

fend

ant poss

esse

d

ma

rijua

na

a

co

ntrol

led

s

ubst

ance

.

a

nd

Sec

ond

tha

t defe

nda

nt

w

aw

are

of i

ts

p

rese

nce a

nd na

ture

th

en

y

ou

w

ill

f

ind th

e def

end

ant g

uilty u

nder Co

unt

of

poss

essi

ng m

ariju

ana.

H

owe

ver

unle

ss you find a

nd

b

elie

ve

fro

m

the

evid

ence beyo

nd

a

rea

sona

ble

do

ub t

each

a

nd

a

ll

of

the

se

pr

opos

ition

s

you

mu

st fi

nd

th

e

d

efen

dan

t

not g

uilt

y

of

tha

t o

flns

e.

M

MC

R 3r

d

3

25.0

2

Sub

mitt

ed

b

y

the

Stat

e


31/79

F

NSI

RUC

1IO

N

N

O

s to

Co

unt

\

if

you find

an

d b

e

ie

e fro

rri

the ev

iden

ce b

eyo

nd

a rea

sona

b e

do

ubt:

Fi

rst

th

at

on

o

r abo

ut

Sep

tem

ber

1

1

2012

in

the Cou

nty

of Fran

klin

Stat

e

o

f

M

iss

ouri

the

def

enda

nt

atte

mpt

ed

to cau

se

seri

ous

phy

sical

inju

ry

t

o

Sgt

oiso

m

by

shoo

ting

him

an

d

Sec

ond.

th

at

Sg

t Fo

lsom

w

as

a

law e

nfiw

cein

eni

off

icer

and

Third.

that

defendant

was

av

are Sgt

Folsom

w

a

l

aw

e

nfor

cem

ent

offic

er.

then

yo

u

will

find

t

he

defe

ndan

t

guil

ty

u

nder

C

oun

t IV

o

f

a

ssau

lt

o

f

a

law

en

forc

emen

t

offi

cer

in

t

fir

st

d

egre

e

un

der

thi

s ins

truct

ion

Ho

wev

er

un

less

yo

u

fin

d

a

nd

be

lieve

fr

om

t

he e

vide

nce

bey

ond

a reaso

nab

le

dou

bt

ea

ch

a

nd

all o

f

thes

e

pr

op

os

iti

on

s

yo

u

m

ust

fin

d th

e d

e

fen

d

an

t

rio

t

g

uilty

o

f

tha

t o

ns

un

der

thi

s

in

struc

tion.

M

AT

CR

3rd

319.

32

Sub

mitt

ed

b

y

th

e Sta

te


32/79

iN

STR

UC

TION

NO

A

s

to

C

ount

V

if

you

fin

d a

nd

bel

ieve

from

th

e ev

iden

ce be

yond

a reas

onab

le do

ubt

Firs

t

tha

t

defe

nda

nt

co

mmi

tted

th

e offen

se

of ass

ault

o

f

a

law

enfo

rcem

ent off

icer

in

t

he

fi

rst

d

egre

e

as

s

ubm

itted

i

n Ins

truct

ion

No

an

d

Se

cond

that

d

efen

dant

com

mitt

ed

tha

t

offen

se w

ith t

he know

ing of

a

de

adly

w

eap

on

then

yo u

will f

ind

the

defe

ndan

t u

lty und

er

C

oun

t V of a

rme

d

cri

mina

l

a

ctio

n

How

ever

unle

ss

yo

u

f

ind

and be

lieve

from

th

e ev

idenc

e

b

eyo

nd

a

re

ason

able dou

bt

eac

h

and a

ll of

t

hese

prop

ositi

ons

ou

mus

t fin

d th

e

defe

nda

nt

no

t

guilt

y o

f t

hat

offe

nse

M

AT C

R

3

32 0

2

Sub

mitt

ed

by the

Stat

e


33/79

INS RUCTION

NO .

dD

As to

Count VI.

if

you find

and believe

f rom the evidence beyond

a

reasonable doubt:

First

that

on

or

about September

11 2012 in

the

County

of Franklin State of

Missouri

the defendant

attempted to

cause serious physical

injury

to

Cpl.

Mertens

by

shooting

him

and

econd

that

p1.

Mertens

was

a

law

enforcement

officer

and

Phird

that defendant

was

aware

Cpl.

Mertens

was

a

law enforcement

officer

then

you

will find

the

defendant

guilty

under Count

VI

of

assault

of

a

law

enforcement

officer

in

the

first degree

under

this instruction.

However

unless you

f ind and

believe

from the evidence beyond a

reasonable doubt

each

and

all

of these

propositions you must find

the

defendant not guilty of that offense under this

instruction.

MM CR

3rd

319.32

Submitted

by

the

State


34/79

INSTRUCTION

O

As

to

Co

unt

Vii

if

fin

d and b

elie

ve

fr

om

the

evid

enc

e beyo

nd

a

re

ason

able doub

t:

Firs t

that

def

enda

nt co

mmi

tted

the of

fens

e

of ass

ault

of

law

enfo

rcem

ent

of

ficer

i

n the

first

deg

ree

as

subm

itte

d in in

struc

tion

No

/

an

d

e

cond

that

defe

ndan

t co

mmi

tted th

at

o

ffen

se

w

ith

the

k

now

ing

of a dead

ly

w

eapo

n

then

you

w

ill

find

the

de

fend

ant g

uilty

un

der ou

t

of

ar

med c

rim

inal

ac t

ion

Ho

wev

er

unle

ss yo

u fin

d

an

d

bel

ieve

from

the

ev

iden

ce be

yon

d a reas

ona

ble d

oubt ea

ch

and

al

l

of

th

ese

pro

posi

tion

s. you

mus

t

find

the

d

efen

dant

not gu

ilty of

t

ha t offe

nse

M

AI

-CR

332

.02

Subm

itte

d

by

the

Sta

te


35/79

INS FlU C

ION NO

The

toIlointt

terms

use

ii

these

instructions

are

defined

s

1olIos:

Attempt

to

commit

an

offense .

he doing

01 any

act hF the

purposL

of committin

an

oftense.

v

eti

act

s

a

substantial

step

to\ard

the comni:ssior

of

the

ol lnse

A

uhstaitial

step

means conduct

which is strongl currohorati\

e

of

the

lirinness

of the actors purpose

to

complete the

commission

of the offense.

Possess. Possessed,

or Possession.

Means

either actual

or

constructi

c

possession

of

the

substance

\

person

as

actual possession

if

the

person has

the

substance on his or

her person or

v

ithin eas reach

n

convenient

control. \ person

ho although not in

actual

possession. has

the

po er

n

intention

at a gi en time to exercise dominion or

control o er

the

substance either

direeth

or

through

another

person or persons

is

in constructive poSsesSion

of

it

tPossession

may also

he

sole or

loint.

if

one person alone has

possession of

a

substance.

possession

is sole.

if to or more persons

share

possession

ot

a

substance.

possesson

is

Joint

Serious

physical

injury.

Means

ph

sical

injury

that creates

a

substantial

risk of death

or that

causes

serious

disfigurement

or

protracted loss

or impairment of the

function of arty part ol the body

\I\l CR

33301

Submitted

l cfendani


36/79

\XIRLCII \

\o

3

The

defendant

IS charged

ith

a

separate oftnse

In each of

the six

counts submitted

to

you

Each

count

must

he

considered

separatel\

ou

should

return

a

separate erdci

for

each

coun: aad \O a can return

oaR one

crdict

for

each

COUflL

MAECR

rd 3 4i2

Submitted b

the tate


37/79

IN

STR

LCT

ION NO

Whe

n

you

reti

re

to vou

rjur

\ ro

om \ ou

will fi

rst sel

ec t

o

ne

you

r

num

ber

to ct

as

y

our

o

repe

rson a

nd to

pre

side ove

r

y

our

de

libe

ratio

ns.

Y

ou

w

ill

the

n disc

uss the

c

ase w

ith

y

our

l

ellow

ju

rors

ch

of y

ou

m

ust

dec

ide

the

c se

fo

r

your

self b

ut

yo

u

sho

uld

do

so

o

nly

after

you

hve

co

nsid

ered l

l

th

e evid

ence

d

iscu

ssed it

f

ully w

ith

th

e

ot

her

juro

rs a

nd

l

isten

ed to

th

e

vi

ews

o

f your tdl

low

jur

ors.

You

r verd

ict w

heth

er guil

ty

or

n

ot gu

ilty m

ust

be agr

eed to

by

e

ch juro

r.

Alth

oug

h the

verd

ict

m

ust be

u

nan

imou

s

th

e

ver

dict

shou

ld

h

e s

igne

d

b

y

you

r

f

orep

erson

a

lone

hen

you h

ve

co

nclud

ed

you

r

del

ibera

tion

s

y

ou will c

omp

lete

the a

ppli

cabl

e

fb

rms

to

whi

ch

you unan

imo

usly

ag

ree

and

retur

n the

m w

ith

a

ll u

nuse

d

form

s and

the

writ

ten

inst

ruct

ions

o

f the

Co

urt.

M

AI

CR 3

rd 30

2.05

Sub

mitt

ed

by th

e

S

tate


38/79

lS RI

Cl l

NO

fhe attornexs

wil l nov

1ir

e

the

upportumt\

ol

arcuinu

the case

to

you

Iheir

areuments

are

intended

le

help

ou

in understanding

the

evidence

and

applying

the law

but th ey are no t

evidence

You

will

bear

in

mind

that it is

your d uty to

be

governed

in your deliberations

by

the

evidence

as you remember

it the

reasonable

inferences which

you believe

should

he

drawn

therefrom and

the l as

given in these instructions

It

is

your

duty

and

yours alone to render

such

verdict

under

the

law

and

the

evidence

as

in

your

reason

and

conscience

is

true

and just

The

states attorney

m u st o pe n the

argument

The deibndanls attorney

may

then

argue

the

case

The

states

attorney

may

then reply

No

further

argument

is

permitted

by

either

side

MA CR

3rd

3 2 6

Submitted

by the

State


39/79

l l l ClION\

/

As

to

Count

I you

have

found

the

defendant

guilty of

possessing

a

controlled

substance.

At this

stage

of

the

trial

it will

he

your

duty

to

determine

within

the

limits prescribed

by law

the

punishment

that

must

be

imposed

ft r those offenses.

[he punishment

prescribed

by

lav for

possessing

a

controlled

substance

is:

Imprisonment

for a

terni ofvcars

fixed by

you.

hut

not

less than

years

and

not to

exceed

seven

years.

2.

Imprisonment

in

the county

jail for

a term

fixed

by

you but

no t

to

exceed

o

jeffrey weinhaus lf vol ii

Documents