State v. Berlin
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from, St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction. I. The statute requires the complaint to be sworn to by a com- ■ petent witness. (Sess.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction. I. The statute requires the complaint to be sworn to by a com- ■ petent witness. (Sess. Acts 1868, p. 269, § 20.) This complaint was made and sworn to by Ann Berlin, wife of David Berlin, the accused, who was an incompetent witness- to testify against her husband in this prosecution against him for adultery or lewdly and lasciviously abiding, etc.; and hence incompetent, under the requirements of the law, to make oath to the information lodged against the accused. It is true the statute does not say, in so many words, that the party by whom…
1Opinion of the Court
Ea00, Judge,
delivered the opinion of the court.
The appellant was proceeded against, in the St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction, upon information made by his wife, Ann Berlin. The complaint sets-out specifically the following charges : 1. Open and notorious adultery. 2. Lewdly and lasciviously abiding and cohabiting with one Mary Jarrett. 3. Open, gross *576lewdness and lascivious behavior. 4. An open and notorious act of public indecency, grossly scandalous.
The defendant was tried and convicted, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $300 and imprisonment in the county jail for a pei’iod of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. EbertSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. UlrichSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Barr v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- State v. DunbarSupreme Court of Missouri · 1950
- State v. EvansSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- State v. ChambersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.