State v. Miller
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. D. D. Fisher, Judge. (1) There was no evidence that tbe appellant secreted tbe property.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. D. D. Fisher, Judge. (1) There was no evidence that tbe appellant secreted tbe property. Secrete, according to Webster, means to bide or conceal, and there was no evidence that appellant bid or concealed! the property, unless by a stretch of meaning, sending property by express, with an open statement from whom it was sent, is a concealing; and the jury might well have construed the language of the instruction to mean that the conduct of appellant was a secreting, and a circumstance which, connected with possession, sustained the indictment.…
1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, J.
At the November term, 1899, of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, the defendant was convicted, under an indictment theretofore preferred by the grand jury of said city against her, and her punishment fixed at four years’ imprisonment in the penitentiary for receiving one gold watch, one gold watch chain, and one gold watch charm, of the alleged aggregate value of. one hundred dollars, the property of one William S. Gannon, knowing that the same had been stolen from him.
*115After unsuccessful motions for a new trial and in arrest, defendant prosecutes this appeal.
On the night of the 29th…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. CantlinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- State v. GuildSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
3Cited by13 opinions
- People v. JacobsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- Fulton v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1913
- State v. LevanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924
- State v. RaderSupreme Court of Missouri · 1914
- State v. SchusterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1955
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.