State v. Quinn
Supreme Court of Missouri
Transferred from. St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) At the time the informations were filed, no jurisdiction attached to try defendant, because unverified. State v. Bragg, 63 Mo. App. 27; State v. Saymon,-61 Mo. App. 244; R. S. 1899, sec. 2477. (2) Defendant, being a merchant, could not he convicted under the dramshop act. State v. Alexander, 73 Mo. App. 606; Knox City v. Whittaker, 87 Mo. App. 472; State v. Witty, 74 Mo. App. 551; State v. Steele, 84 Mo.
Read the full summary
Transferred from. St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) At the time the informations were filed, no jurisdiction attached to try defendant, because unverified. State v. Bragg, 63 Mo. App. 27; State v. Saymon,-61 Mo. App. 244; R. S. 1899, sec. 2477. (2) Defendant, being a merchant, could not he convicted under the dramshop act. State v. Alexander, 73 Mo. App. 606; Knox City v. Whittaker, 87 Mo. App. 472; State v. Witty, 74 Mo. App. 551; State v. Steele, 84 Mo. App. 318. (3) There plainly being collusion between the prosecuting attorney and prosecuting witnesses to procure defendant to violate the…
1Opinion of the CourtBurg-Ess, J.
This case is certified to this court by the St. Louis Court of Appeals on account of the decision being in conflict with State v. Alexander, 73 Mo. App. 605, and State v. Steele, 84 Mo. App. 318.
The opinion of the Court of Appeals is as follows:
‘ ‘ On May 1, 1901, the prosecuting attorney of Butler county filed, in the circuit clerk’s office of .sáid county, four informations against the defendant, charging him with four separate violations of the dramshop act. At the June, 1901, term of the Butler Circuit Court the issues were made up on the four informations and by agreement they were all…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Austin v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1847
- State v. HeinzeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
- State v. HecklerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- State v. PiperMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
- State v. KurtzMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. Salisbury Ice & Fuel Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- State v. HandlerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- State v. ChristopherMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- State v. WillsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- State v. HeibelMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.