State v. Sanders

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Sanders

62 Mo. App. 33, 1895 Mo. App. LEXIS 363

DecidedApril 9, 1895

StatusPublished

This text of 62 Mo. App. 33 (State v. Sanders) 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. Sanders, 62 Mo. App. 33, 1895 Mo. App. LEXIS 363 (Mo. Ct. App. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Rombaueb, P. J.

The fees which a prosecuting attorney is entitled to demand and receive are fixed by section 2 of an act regulating the fees of officials, approved March 31, 1891. (Laws, 1891, p. 139.) Section 3735 of the Revised Statutes of 1889, makes it a misdemeanor for any officer by color of his office to unlawfully and willfully exact or demand or receive, any fees that are not due, and such exaction or demand is, under the provisions of section 3737, punishable by a fine not exceeding $500, or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by both.

The defendant was indicted for unlawfully, willfully, designedly and corruptly, exacting certain fees as late prosecuting attorney of Oregon county, said fees being enumerated in the indictment. He was tried on a change of venue in Ozark county, and was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of $40.

There is no bill of exceptions in the record, nor are any briefs filed by either party. As other parts of the record are regular, we are confined in our examination to the sufficiency of the indictment. While the indictment is verbose and contains a mass of unnecessary repetition, it sufficiently enumerates the fees which the defendant illegally exacted. We take judicial notice of the fact that the fees thus exacted are not such as the prosecuting attorney is by law authorized to demand.

All the judges concurring,

the judgment is affirmed.

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

Rombaueb, P. J.

The fees which a prosecuting attorney is entitled to demand and receive are fixed by section 2 of an act regulating the fees of officials, approved March 31, 1891. (Laws, 1891, p. 139.) Section 3735 of the Revised Statutes of 1889, makes it a misdemeanor for any officer by color of his office to unlawfully and willfully exact or demand or receive, any fees that are not due, and such exaction or demand is, under the provisions of section 3737, punishable by a fine not exceeding $500, or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by both.

The defendant was indicted for unlawfully, willfully, designedly and corruptly, exacting certain fees as late prosecuting attorney of Oregon county, said fees being enumerated in the indictment. He was tried on a change of venue in Ozark county, and was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of $40.

There is no bill of exceptions in the record, nor are any briefs filed by either party. As other parts of the record are regular, we are confined in our examination to the sufficiency of the indictment. While the indictment is verbose and contains a mass of unnecessary repetition, it sufficiently enumerates the fees which the defendant illegally exacted. We take judicial notice of the fact that the fees thus exacted are not such as the prosecuting attorney is by law authorized to demand.

All the judges concurring,

the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 Mo. App. 33, 1895 Mo. App. LEXIS 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-sanders-moctapp-1895.