State v. Hendy
Supreme Court of Missouri
'Appeal from, St. Louis Gounty Circuit Court. — HoN. Rudolph IIiezel, Judge. (1) The identification of the defendant by the prosecuting witnesses being imperfect, and some six or more witnesses discrediting the dubious identification and absolutely without contradiction or conflict towards each other, and they being of apparently substantial standing, and no impeachment of any of them, the court should have set the verdict aside.
Read the full summary
'Appeal from, St. Louis Gounty Circuit Court. — HoN. Rudolph IIiezel, Judge. (1) The identification of the defendant by the prosecuting witnesses being imperfect, and some six or more witnesses discrediting the dubious identification and absolutely without contradiction or conflict towards each other, and they being of apparently substantial standing, and no impeachment of any of them, the court should have set the verdict aside. Dains v. State, 2 Humphrey, 439; 1 Bishop’s Grim. Proc. (4 Ed.), sec. 1272; Garrett v. Greenway, 92 Mo. 125; Spohn v. Bailroad, 87 Mo. 84; Whitsett v. Eansom, 99 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtBuegess, J.
Defendant and one James Drummond were jointly indicted in the circuit court of St. Louis county for robbery in the first degree. He was afterwards awarded a separate trial, and was on the twentieth day of April, 1898, put upon his trial in said court, convicted of the offense with which he was charged and his punishment fixed at five years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
He appeals.
The robbery was committed between five o’clock and rundown on the evening of September 26, 1891, the victim being Mrs. Eose Pavelec. On that evening she, her husband, father and two other persons went to a place…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Birnet v. SharpSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Greenabaum v. MillsapsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Evans-Snyder-Buell Co. v. TurnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. RowlandNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1917