State v. Cole

47 S.W. 895, 145 Mo. 672, 1898 Mo. LEXIS 120
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedNovember 7, 1898
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 47 S.W. 895 (State v. Cole) 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. Cole, 47 S.W. 895, 145 Mo. 672, 1898 Mo. LEXIS 120 (Mo. 1898).

Opinion

Burgess, J.

Defendants were indicted in the circuit court of Adair county for violating the local option law by selling as druggists in the city of Kirks-ville in said county, intoxicating liquors to one S. N. Denton in less quantity than four gallons, without him the said Denton having first obtained a written prescription from a regularly registered and practicing physician authorizing such sale.

At the October term, 1897, defendants filed theif motion to quash the indictment upon the following grounds:

“1. Because it does not allege that the city of Kirksville was an incorporated city.
“2. Because the local option law is unconstitutional.
“3. Because said indictment was found, if found at all, by the October grand jury without having any evidence touching the guilt or innocence of the accused.”

The motion was sustained and the State appealed.

While the. record discloses that by agreement of parties evidence was heard upon the motion to quash the indictment, the evidence is not incorporated in the bill of exceptions, so that we are unable to pass upon its legal effect, and under the circumstances the presumption must be indulged that the court ruled correctly. If an indictment be found by a grand jury without any evidence, it will be quashed on motion of defendant, if he sustain the motion by proper, and competent evidence, and proof of such fact may be made by the testimony of the prosecuting attorney, but it seems that it can not be made by a member of the grand jury. State v. Grady, 84 Mo. 220, and authorities cited.

[674]*674It will be presumed that it was upon this ground that the motion was sustained.

The judgment is affirmed.

Gantt, P. J., and Sherwood, J., concur.

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

Related

State ex inf. Dalton v. Moody
325 S.W.2d 21 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1959)
State v. Shawley
67 S.W.2d 74 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1933)
State v. Chance
221 P. 183 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1923)
State v. Baker
175 S.W. 64 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1915)
McKinney v. United States
199 F. 25 (Eighth Circuit, 1912)
Spencer v. State
1911 OK CR 19 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1911)
State v. Faulkner
84 S.W. 967 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1905)
State v. Runzi
80 S.W. 36 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
47 S.W. 895, 145 Mo. 672, 1898 Mo. LEXIS 120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cole-mo-1898.