State v. Wright
This text of 160 S.W. 1199 (State v. Wright) 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.
Opinion
The defendant was convicted of practicing medicine without a license. His punishment was assessed at imprisonment in the workhouse of the city of St. Louis for a term of three months, and he appeals.
No hill of exceptions was filed, and there is nothing hut the record proper before us. It is our duty, however, under the law, to examine the record and render judgment thereupon. This we have done and find no error therein. The information is sufficient to sustain the conviction, and the judgment is in due form. The judgment of the' court of criminal correction is therefore affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
160 S.W. 1199, 177 Mo. App. 481, 1913 Mo. App. LEXIS 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wright-moctapp-1913.