State v. Harman

27 Mo. 120
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedMarch 15, 1858
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 27 Mo. 120 (State v. Harman) 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. Harman, 27 Mo. 120 (Mo. 1858).

Opinion

Napton, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The question in this case is the same that was determined in the cases of McO’Blenis and Baker, 24 Mo. 402.

The deposition is also objected to as irrelevant and unintelligible. The deposition simply proved that the deponent Melvin (since dead) found a certain watch about the person of the prisoner — a watch which the deponent says was the same watch spoken of by a witness named English on the examination before the recorder. This English was a witness on the trial also and declared the watch he testified about to be the same alluded to by Melvin. We see nothing irrelevant in the deposition, nor any thing unintelligible. [121]*121The deposition was in point, if for no other purpose, to prove that a watch was found in possession of the prisoner, and the subsequent testimony of English conduces to show the materiality of that fact. Whether the identity of the watch found by the officer with the one spoken of by the witness was fully made out, was a question for the jury. The other judges concurring, the judgment will be affirmed.

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

Related

State v. Nicholas
130 S.W. 96 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
State v. Moore
56 S.W. 883 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1900)
State v. Elliott
90 Mo. 350 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1886)
State v. Johnson
12 Nev. 121 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
27 Mo. 120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-harman-mo-1858.