State v. King
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Sullivm Circuit Cowrt. — Hon. Gr. D. Burgess, Judge. (1) The bill of exceptions fails to show the venue of the offense, and for this reason the judgment must necessarily be reversed. State v. McGinniss, 74 Mo. 245; State v. Hartnett, 75 Mo. 251; State v. Hughes, 82 Mo. 86. (2) The tenth instruction given for the state was erroneous. State v. Melton, 102 Mo. 683.
1Opinion of the CourtGantt, P. J.
The defendant was indicted by the grand jury of Sullivan county for an assault with intent to kill, convicted and sentenced to two years in the penitentiary. He assigns as error in his trial that there was no proof that he committed the offense in Sullivan county.
J. D. Elliott, the party assaulted, says he'was in Cora with a load of ties, when he and the defendant had their difficulty. But it nowhere appears that Cora, if a town or village, is in Sullivan county, or in this state. Such evidence has been held insufficient to establish the venue in a number of cases in this court. State v.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. SandersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- State v. SchlossSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- State v. HughesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- State v. HartnettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- State v. MeltonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. AlfordMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- State v. HottleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- State v. KenyonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1939