State v. Lucas
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Pulaslci Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Woodside, . Judge. (1) We are unable to appreciate the force of defendant’s motion to quash the indictment. It sets out a description of the property, and alleges it to have been stolen. It charges. the act to have been committed by the defendant feloniously,, and alleges ownership and value, as required.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaslci Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Woodside, . Judge. (1) We are unable to appreciate the force of defendant’s motion to quash the indictment. It sets out a description of the property, and alleges it to have been stolen. It charges. the act to have been committed by the defendant feloniously,, and alleges ownership and value, as required. It is an exact -copy, so far as may be, of tbe formula approved iu Judge Kelley’s work bn Criminal Law, and has been followed by both tbe bar and courts of this State for many years. Kelley’s Grim. Law, sec. 667. (2) Courts are very reluctant…
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.
— Tbe jury impaneled to try defendant for grand larceny, said larceny consisting in stealing some hogs, as hereinafter described, found him guilty as ■charged, and assessed bis punishment at two years in tbe penitentiary.
Tbe indictment is as follows: “Tbe grand jurors for tbe :State of Missouri, summoned from tbe body of Pulaski county, impaneled, charged and sworn, upon their oaths, present that Ed. Lucas, late of tbe county aforesaid, on tbe 12th day of November, 1895, at tbe county of Pulaski, State aforesaid, eight bead of bogs, one sow with both ears off, of tbe value of ten dollars;…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
- State v. FischerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- State v. CampbellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- State v. RectorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1847
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. FlutcherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902