State v. Clancey
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — -Ho». Daniel D. Fisher, judge. The State was permitted, over appellant’s objection, to introduce evidence tending to show that appellant had registered in another precinct under the name of Patrick Clancey, the circuit attorney stating that its purpose was to show that appellant “actually registered at another precinct . . . there are two crimes, registering twice,” and promising’ to connect appellant therewith.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — -Ho». Daniel D. Fisher, judge. The State was permitted, over appellant’s objection, to introduce evidence tending to show that appellant had registered in another precinct under the name of Patrick Clancey, the circuit attorney stating that its purpose was to show that appellant “actually registered at another precinct . . . there are two crimes, registering twice,” and promising’ to connect appellant therewith. There was no evidence offered later to show that the appellant had registered or signed any hook in the seventh precinct. The effect…
1Opinion of the CourtGantt, P. J.
On September 2, 1908, the grand jury of the city of St. Louis returned an indictment charging appellant with fraudulent registration in that he did on September 14,1908, register under the name, to-wit, that of John Eoss.
On September 28, 1908, defendant was arraigned and, on his refusing to plead, a plea of not guilty was ordered entered for him. On October 7, 1908, a jury was impaneled and sworn and the case was tried, the jury finding defendant guilty and fixing his punishment at five years in the penitentiary. Timely motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment were filed and overruled…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. CummingsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- State v. ThavanotSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- State v. TiernanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909