State v. Carnell

Supreme Court of Missouri

State v. Carnell

84 S.W. 1182, 186 Mo. 88, 1905 Mo. LEXIS 296

DecidedJanuary 31, 1905

StatusPublished

This text of 84 S.W. 1182 (State v. Carnell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Carnell, 84 S.W. 1182, 186 Mo. 88, 1905 Mo. LEXIS 296 (Mo. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

BURGESS, P. J.

— “At the May term, 1903, of the circuit court of Dunklin .county the prosecuting-attorney filed an information against the defendant charging him with feloniously assaulting one F. M. Fletcher. Defendant was afterwards arraigned and entered a plea of not guilty. Trial was had on the seventh day of May, 1903, in which the defendant was convicted by the jury and his punishment fixed at two-years ’ imprisonment in the penitentiary.”

[89]*89Motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were filed and overruled. After this, defendant was sentenced according to law. He filed an affidavit for an appeal to this court.

No bill of exceptions has been filed in this case. The information is in proper form and the record free from error. The judgment is therefore affirmed.

All concur.

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

BURGESS, P. J.

— “At the May term, 1903, of the circuit court of Dunklin .county the prosecuting-attorney filed an information against the defendant charging him with feloniously assaulting one F. M. Fletcher. Defendant was afterwards arraigned and entered a plea of not guilty. Trial was had on the seventh day of May, 1903, in which the defendant was convicted by the jury and his punishment fixed at two-years ’ imprisonment in the penitentiary.”

[89]*89Motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were filed and overruled. After this, defendant was sentenced according to law. He filed an affidavit for an appeal to this court.

No bill of exceptions has been filed in this case. The information is in proper form and the record free from error. The judgment is therefore affirmed.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 S.W. 1182, 186 Mo. 88, 1905 Mo. LEXIS 296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-carnell-mo-1905.