State v. Williams
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Jas. E. Withrow, Judge. (1) In his motion for a new trial, defendant alleges that he has discovered new and material evidence; but does not even state what said evidence is, which, of course, is insufficient to give him a new trial. State v. Sublett, 191 Mo. 175; State v. Bowman, 161 Mo. 94; Graham & Wat. on New Trials, 470. (2) The evidence clearly shows that defendant is guilty of both burglary and larceny.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Jas. E. Withrow, Judge. (1) In his motion for a new trial, defendant alleges that he has discovered new and material evidence; but does not even state what said evidence is, which, of course, is insufficient to give him a new trial. State v. Sublett, 191 Mo. 175; State v. Bowman, 161 Mo. 94; Graham & Wat. on New Trials, 470. (2) The evidence clearly shows that defendant is guilty of both burglary and larceny. State v. Hecock, 83 Mo. 531; State v. Higgins, 88 Mo. 354; State v. Gazelle, 30 Mo. 92; Rex v. Walsh, 1 Mood. C. C. 14; Delk v. State, 64…
1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.
This cause comes here by appeal on the part of the defendant from a judgment of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis convicting him of burglary and larceny.
The indictment upon .which this prosecution is predicated is as follows:
‘ ‘ The grand jurors of the State of Missouri, within and for the body of thé city of St. Louis, now here in court, duly impaneled, sworn and charged, upon their oath present, that Frank Smith and Rube Williams on the eighteenth day of- March in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred five, at the city of St. Louis' aforesaid, into a certain store, shop…
2Cited by5 opinions
- State v. SteeleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- Royal v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
- Blakley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1930
- State v. HookSupreme Court of Kansas · 1939
- State v. LongMissouri Court of Appeals · 1915