State v. Gilmore

Supreme Court of Missouri

State v. Gilmore

57 Mo. 280

Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided August 15, 1874·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Wag-Nek, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the.court.

The defendant was a justice of the Buchanan County Court; ami was indicted for voting for an appropriation not directed or warranted by law. The court sustained a demurrer to the indictment.

The case is essentially the same as that of the State vs. Piuger decided at this term, and according to that decision the judgment must be affirmed.

The other judges concur, except Judge Sherwood who is absent.

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

Wag-Nek, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the.court.

The defendant was a justice of the Buchanan County Court; ami was indicted for voting for an appropriation not directed or warranted by law. The court sustained a demurrer to the indictment.

The case is essentially the same as that of the State vs. Piuger decided at this term, and according to that decision the judgment must be affirmed.

The other judges concur, except Judge Sherwood who is absent.

State v. Gilmore, 57 Mo. 280 (Mo. 1874).

Pincite

57 Mo. 280 (State v. Gilmore) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related