State v. Haycroft

49 Mo. App. 488, 1892 Mo. App. LEXIS 251
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 25, 1892
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 49 Mo. App. 488 (State v. Haycroft) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Haycroft, 49 Mo. App. 488, 1892 Mo. App. LEXIS 251 (Mo. Ct. App. 1892).

Opinion

Ellison, J.

Defendant was convicted of a misdemeanor before a justice of the peace under section 3784, Revised Statutes, 1889. He appealed to the circuit court where he was again convicted, and he comes here for a review of the case. The information is in two counts, but it is conceded that they are for the same offense. Defendant’s conviction in the justice’s court was general, without mentioning either count. In the circuit court, the record shows that he was proceeded [491]*491against on the first count. He endeavored to abate the cause in the circuit court, upon the idea as we gather it from the. brief, that since the verdict of the jury in the justice’s court was general, and was silent as to the count upon which he was found guilty, it amounted to an acquittal on one count, and, as the counts were conceded to be for the same offense, it amounted to an acquittal on both counts. This contention cannot be allowed. When there is but one offense charged in separate counts, a general verdict is sufficient, and defendant’s suggestions have no application to such a case. He was tried and convicted before the justice for only one offense, and before the circuit court, on appeal, for the same offense, and where anything occurred to abate the cause in the circuit court we are not able to discover.

II. It -is next urged that the conviction is void for the reason that defendant was not arraigned in the circuit court. In misdemeanors there should be an arraignment. State v. Geiger, 45 Mo. App. 111. But if such arraignment is made and entered in the justice’s court there need not be a rearraignment in the circuit court on appeal.

The judgment is affirmed.

All concur.

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

Related

State v. Simpson
103 S.W. 592 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1907)
State v. Mikel
102 S.W. 19 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1907)
State v. Hull
73 Mo. App. 300 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1898)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 Mo. App. 488, 1892 Mo. App. LEXIS 251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-haycroft-moctapp-1892.