State v. Marcks
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Criminal Court. (1) The proper course to pursue is not to admit evidence, the competency and relevancy of which is not apparent until the competency or relevancy is disclosed by the subsequent evidence.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Criminal Court. (1) The proper course to pursue is not to admit evidence, the competency and relevancy of which is not apparent until the competency or relevancy is disclosed by the subsequent evidence. State v. Thomas, 99 Mo. 235. (2) That on the eighth day of May, five weeks after the alleged assault, the defendant was suffering from gonorrhea, was not such a fact, either by itself or in connection with the fact that the prosecuting witness was then also suffering from the same disorder, as proved or rendered probable the existence or nonexistence of the fact that…
1Dissent
Sherwood,. J.
(dissenting)
The charge in this case is rape, of which defendant was convicted and his sentence fixed at five years in the penitentiary. From the judgment he has appealed. The locality of the crime charged was a small kitchen on thdground floor, in which was a bed on which defendant and his wife slept. There were only three rooms on the ground floor, and these were let to defendant, who in one of the other two rooms carried on with his wife the business of coat making or tailoring. The kitchen, which, performed the triple function of kitchen, dormitory, and dining room, was…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State v. HopeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
- Commonwealth v. StrattonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- State v. PatrickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- State v. SchlossSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- State v. WebsterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.