State v. Hambleton
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Polk Circuit Court. The indictment, which is set out in the opinion of the court, being quashed below, the circuit attorney, on behalf of the State, appealed to this court.' 1. The indictment does not follow the words of the statute. It should have charged the defendant with killing certain cattle, instead of a certain horse beast.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Polk Circuit Court. The indictment, which is set out in the opinion of the court, being quashed below, the circuit attorney, on behalf of the State, appealed to this court.' 1. The indictment does not follow the words of the statute. It should have charged the defendant with killing certain cattle, instead of a certain horse beast. (2 Hawk. ch. 25, § 110.) 2. The indictment is also defective in not charging malice against the owner, or otherwise describing the offence, so as to have made it apparent that the act was malicious. (State v. Jackson, 22 Iredell’s Rep. B29.) 8. The…
1Opinion of the CourtRyland, Judge
The only question in this case is upon the sufficiency of the indictment, which is as follows, to-wit;
“ State of Missouri, county of Polk. In the Circuit Court, October term, A. D. 1853. The grand jurors for the State of Missouri, sworn, and charged to inquire for the body of the county of Polk, upon their oath present, that Montraville Hambleton, late of the county of Polk aforesaid, on the 10th day of September, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and fifty-three, at the county of Polk aforesaid, did then and there unlawfully, wilfully, maliciously and feloniously kill a certain horse…
2Cited by12 opinions
- State v. LarsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1997
- Cruse ex rel. Cruse v. Government Employees Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1965
- State v. BoiesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1903
- State v. BrookhouseWashington Supreme Court · 1894
- State v. LawnSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.