State v. Fawcett
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Criminal Court. I. The appellant insists that he was entitled to his discharge upon the statement of the case. See Rev. Stat. page 856, sections 9, 10 and 11. That when the statute so provides, any condition attached is a violation of the discharge. II. That the court has no power to impose costs, except in the cases contemplated in the eleventh section, i. e., where both parties are in court, but there is no complaint.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Criminal Court. I. The appellant insists that he was entitled to his discharge upon the statement of the case. See Rev. Stat. page 856, sections 9, 10 and 11. That when the statute so provides, any condition attached is a violation of the discharge. II. That the court has no power to impose costs, except in the cases contemplated in the eleventh section, i. e., where both parties are in court, but there is no complaint. Defendant was discharged under the provisions of the tenth section of first article of act regulating practice and proceedings in criminal cases, page…
1Opinion of the CourtRylAND, Judge
Fawcett had been required to enter into a recognizance before a justice of the peace, for his appearance before the Criminal Court, and, in the mean time, to keep the peace until his appearance at that court. On the first day of the term of the court, Fawcett appeared, but the person, on whose affidavit he was arrested before the justice of the peace, neglected to appear. The Criminal Court discharged Fawcett, but adjudged the costs of the prosecution to be paid by him. To this he excepted, and brings the case before this court.
1. The error relied upon, for reversing the case, is, the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- State v. HoffmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1853