State v. McChesney
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from the St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) The indictment charges no crime. It does not sufficiently inform the defendant of the nature of the offence of which he is accused. It does not comply with the rules of criminal pleading at common law, nor with the requirements of section 1561, Revised Statutes.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) The indictment charges no crime. It does not sufficiently inform the defendant of the nature of the offence of which he is accused. It does not comply with the rules of criminal pleading at common law, nor with the requirements of section 1561, Revised Statutes. State v. Helm, 6 Mo. 263; State v. Boss, 25 Mo. 426 ; State v. Boers, 49 Mo. 542. It is better, under the statute, to state of what the false pretense, or trick, consisted. State v. Porter, 75 Mo. 171. The statute ought to be strictly construed. To hold this indictment good is to go…
1Opinion of the Court
Nokton, J. —
The defendant was tried in the criminal court of the city of St. Louis, on an indictment founded on section 1561, Revised Statutes, and was convicted. From the judgment of conviction he appealed to the St. Louis court of appeals, where it was affirmed, and from that judgment he appeals to this court.
The first question which the record presents for our determination, relates to the sufficiency of the indictment, the sufficiency of which was questioned in the trial court by a demurrer to it, which was overruled. Omitting the formal parts of the indictment, it is as follows : It…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Morton v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
- State v. HelmSupreme Court of Missouri · 1840
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. TerrySupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Bates v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
- State v. CameronSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- State v. MorganSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- State v. ClaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.