State v. Rolley

37 S.W. 827, 135 Mo. 677, 1896 Mo. LEXIS 288
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided November 20, 1896·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Sherwood, J.

The defendant, indicted for and convicted of obtaining money under false pretenses, and his punishment assessed at three years in the penitentiary, appeals to this court.

The defendant is not represented in this court by counsel and so we have examined the record. The indictment is in proper form, but it does not appear from the record nor from an indorsement upon it by the clerk, that the bill of exceptions was ever filed. In such circumstances, the supposed bill must be disre[678] garded as not being properly authenticated. Lafollette v. Thompson, 83 Mo. 199.

As there is no error in the record proper, we affirm the judgment.

All concur.

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

State v. Rolley, 37 S.W. 827, 135 Mo. 677, 1896 Mo. LEXIS 288 (Mo. 1896).

37 S.W. 827 (State v. Rolley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Borders
128 S.W. 737 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1910)
Jaco v. Southern Missouri & Arkansas Railway Co.
68 S.W. 379 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1902)
Wilson v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad
66 S.W. 928 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1902)
Bates v. Ruth & Mengal Realty Co.
88 Mo. App. 550 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1901)
Finlay v. Gill
80 Mo. App. 458 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1899)
Ricketts v. Hart
73 Mo. App. 647 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1898)