State v. Wiley

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Wiley

49 Mo. App. 269, 1892 Mo. App. LEXIS 207

DecidedApril 5, 1892

StatusPublished

This text of 49 Mo. App. 269 (State v. Wiley) 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. Wiley, 49 Mo. App. 269, 1892 Mo. App. LEXIS 207 (Mo. Ct. App. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Rombauer, P. J.

This is a prosecution upon an information for petit larceny. The defendant was convicted and appealed, but whether to this court or to the supreme court is .not quite clear upon the record. The transcript was sent to the supreme court, but that court, upon the motion of the attorney general, ordered its transfer to this court.

Neither party has filed any briefs in the cause, nor have any errors' been assigned by appellant. As it is our duty in criminal cases to examine the record regardless of any assignment of errors, we have done so in this case and find no error in the record. The information is formally sufficient, the testimony amply substantiates the offense, and the instructions of the court, nearly all of which were given at defendant’s request, are not subject to any objection.

All the judges concurring,

the judgment is affirmed.

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

Rombauer, P. J.

This is a prosecution upon an information for petit larceny. The defendant was convicted and appealed, but whether to this court or to the supreme court is .not quite clear upon the record. The transcript was sent to the supreme court, but that court, upon the motion of the attorney general, ordered its transfer to this court.

Neither party has filed any briefs in the cause, nor have any errors' been assigned by appellant. As it is our duty in criminal cases to examine the record regardless of any assignment of errors, we have done so in this case and find no error in the record. The information is formally sufficient, the testimony amply substantiates the offense, and the instructions of the court, nearly all of which were given at defendant’s request, are not subject to any objection.

All the judges concurring,

the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 Mo. App. 269, 1892 Mo. App. LEXIS 207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wiley-moctapp-1892.