State v. McLain
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Cape Girardeau Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry 0. Riley, Judge. (1) Defendant’s motion to quash should have been sustained. Section 1959, Revised Statutes, entitled, “Destruction of fruit and ornamental trees,” etc., which the State invokes in support of the information, has no application.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cape Girardeau Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry 0. Riley, Judge. (1) Defendant’s motion to quash should have been sustained. Section 1959, Revised Statutes, entitled, “Destruction of fruit and ornamental trees,” etc., which the State invokes in support of the information, has no application. (2) The offense charged in the information consists of two separate and distinct acts: “The putting and placing, and causing to be put and placed, certain and divers, large pieces of iron concealed within certain sheaves or bundles of wheat/’ and the causing of “the said bundles of wheat and the…
1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.
The defendant was convicted of the malicious destruction of a threshing machine by causing a boy, who-was his ward, to hide pieces of iron in the shocks of wheat on the farm of a neighbor of the defendant, by the name of' Thompson, knowing that said wheat would be cleaned by the thresher, and intending that the machine should be injured or ruined by the iron being carried through it along with the bundles of wheat in which it was concealed.
A motion to quash the information was filed and overruled and this ruling is assigned for error, the theory of the assignment being that section 1959 of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. WalkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- State v. JonesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- State v. WattsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- State v. WatsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1861
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. SargentMissouri Court of Appeals · 1953
- State ex rel. Smith v. DykemanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- State v. WestonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1955
- State v. ShanksMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910