State v. Vaughan
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.— Hon. Eobt. M. Foster, Judge. (1) The State’s evidence was properly admitted; the record of defendant’s former convictions and terms in the State penitentiary certainly showed that he was an habitual criminal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.— Hon. Eobt. M. Foster, Judge. (1) The State’s evidence was properly admitted; the record of defendant’s former convictions and terms in the State penitentiary certainly showed that he was an habitual criminal. R. S. 1899, sec. 2379; State v. Carr, 146 Mo. 1. (2) The evidence abundantly establishes the fact of defendant’s presence at the front door of Seiving’s drug store on the night of the robbery, and at the very time of the robbery. And the evidence further clearly shows that the man at said door had a pistol in his hand, and aided the robber in…
1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, P. J.
The defendant was convicted in the circuit court of the city of St. Louis of robbery in the first degree as an habitual criminal. The offense of which he was convicted was alleged in the information to have been committed October 15, 1904. The name of the person robbed was Gustave W. Seiving, and the amount taken from him $24.
At a trial had on the 27th day of January, 1905, the defendant was tried, found guilty of robbery in the first degree as charged and his punishment fixed at thirty-five years in the penitentiary. He appeals and assigns error. Defendant is not represented in this court.
*110The…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. CarrSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. SaundersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1921
- State v. OertelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1919
- State v. PayneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909