State v. Bregard

76 Mo. 322
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided October 15, 1882·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Sherwood, J.

The indictment charged that defendant on, etc., at, etc., “ did unlawfully set up and keep a common bawdy house.” The indictment is well enough, since it follows the language of the statute on which it is bottomed. R. S. 1879, p. 270, § 1550.

The only particular in which the precise language of the statute is not followed, is in the substitution of the word and for the word or; but this is proper as recently [323] decided by this court. State v. Pittman, ante, p. 56. The authorities cited by the State fully sustain the validity of the indictment. Therefore, judgment reversed and cause remanded.

All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State v. Bregard, 76 Mo. 322 (Mo. 1882).

76 Mo. 322 (State v. Bregard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Spano
6 S.W.2d 849 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1928)
State v. Hogle
137 S.W. 21 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1911)
State v. Newman
132 S.W. 753 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
State v. Currier
125 S.W. 461 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1910)
City of St. Louis v. St. Louis Theatre Co.
100 S.W. 627 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1907)
State v. Raymond
86 Mo. App. 537 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1901)
State v. Montgomery
109 Mo. 645 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1891)