State v. Hilderbrand

Supreme Court of Missouri

State v. Hilderbrand

105 Mo. 318

CourtSupreme Court of Missouri

DecidedApril 15, 1891

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 105 Mo. 318 (State v. Hilderbrand) 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. Hilderbrand, 105 Mo. 318 (Mo. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Macfarlane, J.

Defendant was jointly indicted with. Henry T. Melrose and James Parris for the larceny of a steer. On the trial witnesses were permitted to detail in evidence, over defendant’s objection, declarations made by Farris, subsequent to the common criminal enterprise, which tended to prove defendant’s complicity in the crime. Under the authority of State v. Melrose, 98 Mo. 594, the admission of these declarations was error.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

All concur.

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

Macfarlane, J.

Defendant was jointly indicted with. Henry T. Melrose and James Parris for the larceny of a steer. On the trial witnesses were permitted to detail in evidence, over defendant’s objection, declarations made by Farris, subsequent to the common criminal enterprise, which tended to prove defendant’s complicity in the crime. Under the authority of State v. Melrose, 98 Mo. 594, the admission of these declarations was error.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 Mo. 318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hilderbrand-mo-1891.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack