State v. Donnegan

34 Mo. 67
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided March 15, 1863·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Bates, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant was indicted for stealing a horse, mare, buggy and set of harness. Before the trial, the circuit attorney announced that he would not further prosecute the indictment against the defendant so far as the same relates to the charge of the larceny of the buggy and set pf harness.

We cannot see that there was any error in this prejudicial to the defendant. At the trial, evidence was given of the larceny of a gelding, and objection was made that it did not support the indictment for stealing a horse. There is no force in the objection.

Judgment affirmed.

Judges Bay and Dryden concur.

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

State v. Donnegan, 34 Mo. 67 (Mo. 1863).

34 Mo. 67 (State v. Donnegan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Collins
163 P. 102 (Montana Supreme Court, 1917)
State v. Matejousky
115 N.W. 96 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1908)
State v. Gooch
29 S.W. 640 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1895)
State v. Buckles
26 Kan. 237 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1881)
People v. Butler
2 Utah 504 (Utah Supreme Court, 1880)
State v. Hill
65 Mo. 84 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1877)