State v. Miller
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Ho». Daniel G. Taylor, Judge. The verdict and judgment are insufficient in law. The defendant was charged with having aided and assisted in establishing a lottery “as a business and avocation.” This allegation and the proof thereof was necessary.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Ho». Daniel G. Taylor, Judge. The verdict and judgment are insufficient in law. The defendant was charged with having aided and assisted in establishing a lottery “as a business and avocation.” This allegation and the proof thereof was necessary. State v. Pomeroy, 130 Mo. 497; State v. DeWitt, 186 Mo. 61. (1) As no bill of exceptions was filed at the February term, and as no time was given within which to file the same, the exceptions attempted to be preserved in the motion for a new trial cannot be considered. ■ State v. Broderick, 70 Mo. 622;…
1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.
This cause comes here upon appeal by defendant from a judgment of conviction in the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, upon an indictment charging defendant with a violation of the provisions of section 2219, Revised Statutes 1899.
*675The record in this canse discloses that on March 26, 1904, being a part of the February term of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, defendant was put upon his trial before a jury duly empaneled for the offense charged in the indictment, and they returned a verdict of guilty, in the following form:
“State of Missouri vs. Louis Miller.
On indictment for…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. BroderickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Sanguinette v. Mississippi River & Bonne Terre Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- State v. LarewSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- State v. StandleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- State v. HarrounSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.