State v. Harmon
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Moniteau Circuit Court. — Hon. E. L. Edwards, Judge. The defendant was indicted in the circuit court of Moniteau county at the September term, 1889, for embezzlement and grand larceny. The indictment contains fifteen counts. The first was for embezzlement; the remaining fourteen were for grand larceny. The evidence showed that the defendant was the clerk .and employe of a mercantile firm, Cavers & Thomas, in California, Missouri.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Moniteau Circuit Court. — Hon. E. L. Edwards, Judge. The defendant was indicted in the circuit court of Moniteau county at the September term, 1889, for embezzlement and grand larceny. The indictment contains fifteen counts. The first was for embezzlement; the remaining fourteen were for grand larceny. The evidence showed that the defendant was the clerk .and employe of a mercantile firm, Cavers & Thomas, in California, Missouri. The evidence on the part of the state tended to show that the other clerks watched the defendant and discovered many irregularities in the taking of…
1Concurrence
Macfarlane, J.,
concurs in paragraphs 1 and 8, and expresses no opinion as to paragraph 2. Thomas, J., concurs in paragraphs 1 and 3 and will express his views as to the point involved in paragraph 2 in a separate opinion. Judgment reversed, and the causo remanded.
Thomas, J.—I do not concur in paragraph 2 of the foregoing opinion. I do not believe that section 3947, Revised Statutes, 1889, is in conflict with section 22 of our bill of rights, which provides that a party accused of crime shall have the right ‘ ‘ to demand the nature and cause of the accusation.” The word “embezzlement,” as used…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. PorterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
- State v. BroderickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- State v. ArterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877