State v. Walker

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Walker

24 Mo. App. 679, 1887 Mo. App. LEXIS 249

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 23, 1887

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 24 Mo. App. 679 (State v. Walker) 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. Walker, 24 Mo. App. 679, 1887 Mo. App. LEXIS 249 (Mo. Ct. App. 1887).

Pincite

Opinion

Rombauer, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant was tried upon an information filed by the prosecuting attorney of Carter county, for selling liquor without a license. He was found guilty, and his [680]*680punishment assessed at a fine of forty dollars. Neither the evidence, nor the instructions of the court, are preserved in the record, and we are confined, in our examination of alleged errors, to such as may appear on the record proper, and which are raised by a motion, stating as grounds for arresting the judgment:

1. That the facts stated in the information do not constitute a public offence.

2. That the verdict is insufficient to sustain the judgment.

The information follows the statute and is sufficient. The verdict is a general verdict of guilty, and, although informal, sufficiently definite. The State v. Cook, 58 Mo. 547; The State v. Steptoe, 65 Mo. 643; The State v. McDonald, 85 Mo. 543.

The judgment is affirmed.

All the judges concur.

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

Rombauer, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant was tried upon an information filed by the prosecuting attorney of Carter county, for selling liquor without a license. He was found guilty, and his [680]*680punishment assessed at a fine of forty dollars. Neither the evidence, nor the instructions of the court, are preserved in the record, and we are confined, in our examination of alleged errors, to such as may appear on the record proper, and which are raised by a motion, stating as grounds for arresting the judgment:

1. That the facts stated in the information do not constitute a public offence.

2. That the verdict is insufficient to sustain the judgment.

The information follows the statute and is sufficient. The verdict is a general verdict of guilty, and, although informal, sufficiently definite. The State v. Cook, 58 Mo. 547; The State v. Steptoe, 65 Mo. 643; The State v. McDonald, 85 Mo. 543.

The judgment is affirmed.

All the judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 Mo. App. 679, 1887 Mo. App. LEXIS 249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-walker-moctapp-1887.

Opinion

2. That the verdict is insufficient to sustain the judgment.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack