State v. Tate
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Neivton Circuit Court. — Hon. John C. Lamson, Judge. (1) There is quite as much ground for argument that Tate was present, aiding and abetting in the assault on Meadows,, as that he had advised and counseled it before. But that there is any substantial evidence of either fact however slight, we deny. State v. Chambers, 87 Mo. 406; State v. Tice, 90 Mo. 112; Union Nat.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Neivton Circuit Court. — Hon. John C. Lamson, Judge. (1) There is quite as much ground for argument that Tate was present, aiding and abetting in the assault on Meadows,, as that he had advised and counseled it before. But that there is any substantial evidence of either fact however slight, we deny. State v. Chambers, 87 Mo. 406; State v. Tice, 90 Mo. 112; Union Nat. Bank v. Barker, 145 Mo. 356; State v. Lackland, 136 Mo. 26; Glover v. Buhle, 19 Mo. 360; 3 Jones on Evid., sec. 872; Biney v. Vanlandingham, 9 Mo. 816; 2 Whar. on Evid., sec. 570; 1 Grriff. on Evid., sec. 469; 1…
1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, J.
At the May term, 1896 of the circuit court of Newton county', the defendant and one *669William South were jointly indicted by the grand jury of said county, and charged in the first count in the indictment. with feloniously, on purpose and of their malice aforethought, shooting with a pistol with intent to kill one William Meadows at said county on or about the twenty-sixth day of April, 1896, and in the second count with feloniously assaulting said Meadows with intent to rob.
At the May term, 1897, of said court on motion of defendant Tate, a severance was granted him. He then filed his…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State v. SimonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1927
- State v. NorrisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1963
- State v. TateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900
- State v. LyonsNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1936