State v. Dodson

72 Mo. 283
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedOctober 15, 1880
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 72 Mo. 283 (State v. Dodson) 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. Dodson, 72 Mo. 283 (Mo. 1880).

Opinion

Sherwood, C. J.

I. The statute expressly gives a defendant in criminal, as well as in civil cases, the entire term wherein to file his bill of exceptions, so that it makes no difference if the affidavit, for the appeal is filed previously or subsequently to the tiling of the bill of exceptions.

II. If there was any irregularity in the affidavit for taking the cause from the regular judge, bj7 reason of such affidavit lacking the oath of two or more reputable persons, this did not oust the jurisdiction of the special judge. Any objections on the score of irregularity should have been taken at the time, and cannot be listened to here. State v. Knight, 61 Mo. 373.

III. The indictment, which was for embezzling three horses, was framed under the first clause of section 35, page 458,1 Wagner’s Statutes. The agency of the defendant is -distinctly set forth. The indictment is sufficient. State v. Meyers, 68 Mo. 266.

IV. As the indictment charged the embezzlement of the horses, any evidence respecting the embezzlement of the proceeds of the horses, was clearly inadmissible, and any instructions based upon such evideuce, erroneous. Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

All concur.

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

Related

State v. Florian
200 S.W.2d 64 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1947)
State v. Meininger
268 S.W. 71 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1925)
People v. Nelson
233 P. 406 (California Court of Appeal, 1924)
Munoz v. State (Fla. 3-3-1924)
99 So. 555 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1924)
State v. Thomas
256 S.W. 1028 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1923)
State v. Horne
220 P. 378 (Utah Supreme Court, 1923)
State v. Stevens
220 S.W. 844 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1920)
J. H. Tschudy Hardwood Lumber Co. v. Hotel Investment Co.
183 S.W. 1091 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1916)
State v. McBrien
178 S.W. 489 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1915)
State v. Mispagel
106 S.W. 513 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1907)
Coffey v. City of Carthage
98 S.W. 562 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1906)
Wright v. Kansas City
86 S.W. 452 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1905)
State v. Nave
84 S.W. 1 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1904)
State v. Meysenburg
71 S.W. 229 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1902)
State v. Lynn
70 S.W. 127 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1902)
State v. Schilb
60 S.W. 82 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1900)
State v. Crosswhite
32 S.W. 991 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1895)
State v. Gamble
108 Mo. 500 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1891)
Hicks v. Hoos
44 Mo. App. 571 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1891)
Clements v. Greenwell
40 Mo. App. 589 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1890)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 Mo. 283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-dodson-mo-1880.