State v. Reed
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Cass Circuit Court.—How. N. M. Gtvan, Judge. (1) The indictment is insufficient. It does not follow the language of the statute. The latter does not intend to punish a concealment of the offender from motives of humanity or charity, or from any other motive or interest than that the offender “may escape' or avoid arrest, trial, conviction or punishment.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cass Circuit Court.—How. N. M. Gtvan, Judge. (1) The indictment is insufficient. It does not follow the language of the statute. The latter does not intend to punish a concealment of the offender from motives of humanity or charity, or from any other motive or interest than that the offender “may escape' or avoid arrest, trial, conviction or punishment.” The indictment should have been in the language of the statute and charged that the acts complained of were done with no other motive or intent. Archbold’s Pleading and Evidence (5 Am. Ed.) side page 692. (2) The ■ evidence does…
1Opinion of the CourtHenry, C. J.
The defendant was indicted in the; Cass circuit court as accessory after the fact to a grand larceny charged to have been committed by one John D. Fredericks. A trial of the cause was had at the November term, 1884, of said court, which resulted in the conviction of defendant, and his punishment was. assessed at two years’ imprisonment in the penitentiary. The indictment is based upon .section 1650, Revised Statutes, which reads as follows: “Every person not standing in the relation of husband or wife, parent or-grandparent, child or grandchild, brother or sister, by consanguinity or…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Laytham v. AgnewSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. SpraySupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- State v. CrowSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- State v. SellaNevada Supreme Court · 1917
- State v. FrySupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
- Meredith v. WilkinsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.