State v. Chinn
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Greene Cou/nty Criminal Court. — Hon. J. J. Gtdeon, Judge. (1)1 The instrument set forth in the indictment does not purport to have the signature of anyone attached thereto — that is- to -say, the name, “Mrs. Austin,” is not the name of any particular person, and is not the subject of forgery, and could not purport to be the act of any particular person. Bishop’s New Crim.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Greene Cou/nty Criminal Court. — Hon. J. J. Gtdeon, Judge. (1)1 The instrument set forth in the indictment does not purport to have the signature of anyone attached thereto — that is- to -say, the name, “Mrs. Austin,” is not the name of any particular person, and is not the subject of forgery, and could not purport to be the act of any particular person. Bishop’s New Crim. Law, p. 465, sec. 766. (2) It has been beld in this State in civil cases that a surname without the Christian name is no name at all; a fortiori should this be so in a criminal case. Martin v. Barron, 37 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, J.
At the March term, 1896, of the Greene county criminal court, the defendant was indicted by the grand jury of said county, and charged in the first count of the indictment with forging an order, and in the second count with uttering and publishing the same knowing it to be forged with intent to defraud. At the July term, 1896, of .said court, he was put upon his trial, and acquitted of the crime charged against him in the .first 'cofint, but was con*510victed under the second count, and his punishment fixed at an imprisonment of two years in the penitentiary. Defendant in due time filed motions…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stewart v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
3Cited by2 opinions
- Anderson v. MeierWyoming Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. DavisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908