State v. Clark
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Mon. Wm. M. Kinsey, Judge. The instruction authorizing the conviction of defendant of the offense of attempted sodomy was not warranted by the evidence and the verdict finding him guilty of attempted sodomy was contrary to the evidence and not responsive to the issues under the evidence.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Mon. Wm. M. Kinsey, Judge. The instruction authorizing the conviction of defendant of the offense of attempted sodomy was not warranted by the evidence and the verdict finding him guilty of attempted sodomy was contrary to the evidence and not responsive to the issues under the evidence. A careful analysis of the evidence will disclose that whatever proof was made under the information tended to show that the completed offense had been perpetrated. We request special attention be given to the testimony of the victim, Ruby Alfend, showing his…
1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, J.
On June 28, 1906, the assistant circuit attorney of the city of St. Louis filed an information in the circuit court of said city, charging the defendant with having committed the crime of sodomy with one Ruby Alfend, a boy of the age of twelve years. Thereafter, upon trial had, he was found guilty of an attempt to commit said crime, and his punishment assessed at imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term of five years. Timely motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were filed by *393the defendant, and the same having been overruled, an appeal was taken to this court.
The facts, briefly…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. ScottSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- State v. BellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- State v. HarrisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. GadwoodSupreme Court of Missouri · 1938
- State v. McCafferySupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- State v. McDarisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1967