State v. Dunham
This text of 76 S.W. 1008 (State v. Dunham) 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.
Opinion
The defendant was indicted in Caldwell county for an assault with intent to kill Ed Nichols. He was tried and convicted, and from the sentence imposed has appealed to this court. The defendant is not represented in this court, and has filed no [2]*2brief, but under the statute we have been required to go through the whole record to ascertain if prejudicial error was committed against him. We find that no exception was taken or saved to the overruling of his motion for a new trial, and we' are therefore restricted to the record proper. [State v. Weinegard, 168 Mo. 490.] The indictment is in due form; the arraignment, regular; and the summoning and impaneling of the jury, and the return of the verdict and sentence thereon are in all respects in proper form. The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
76 S.W. 1008, 178 Mo. 1, 1903 Mo. LEXIS 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-dunham-mo-1903.