State v. Woods
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Boone Circuit Court. — Hon. Samuel Davis, Special Judge. (1) The court erred in instructing the jury that they might convict the defendant on each count and should do so if they found he made both sales charged in the indictment and in failing to instruct them that they might acquit him on each count or either count of the indictment, where the court attempted in one instruction to define the law governing the whole case.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Boone Circuit Court. — Hon. Samuel Davis, Special Judge. (1) The court erred in instructing the jury that they might convict the defendant on each count and should do so if they found he made both sales charged in the indictment and in failing to instruct them that they might acquit him on each count or either count of the indictment, where the court attempted in one instruction to define the law governing the whole case. State v. Vaughn, 200 Mo. 1; State v. Price, 111 Mr. App. 423; State v. Lientz, 184 Mo. 223; Toncrey v. Railroad, 129 Mo. App. 596; Purcell v. Railroad, 126 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
— Defendant was indicted for selling intoxicating liquors in violation of the Local Option Law. The indictment was in two counts, for two separate sales on the same day, and he was convicted on each.
The chief ground of the appeal is that the trial court did not instruct the jury, though not asked to do so by defendant, that they could find him not guilty-on one count and guilty on another, or not guilty on both counts. The court did instruct on the first count that each separate sale constituted a separate offense and that if the jury believed that defendant sold the liquor to the prosecuting…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. VaughanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- State v. EspenschiedSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- State v. JamesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- State v. BarnettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- State v. PriceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905