State v. Mertens
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL from St. Louis Criminal Court. STATEMENT OE THE CASE. At the May term of the St. Louis criminal court, the grand jury of St. Louis county found and returned into court an indictment against the defendant for stealing certain property of Joseph Mentdrops, therein named, in and from the dwelling house of Gertard Timmerman, under the 30th and 36th §, art. 3, pages 359, 360, of the act concerning “crimes and punishments.”
Read the full summary
APPEAL from St. Louis Criminal Court. STATEMENT OE THE CASE. At the May term of the St. Louis criminal court, the grand jury of St. Louis county found and returned into court an indictment against the defendant for stealing certain property of Joseph Mentdrops, therein named, in and from the dwelling house of Gertard Timmerman, under the 30th and 36th §, art. 3, pages 359, 360, of the act concerning “crimes and punishments.” Afterwaids, this cause coming on to he tried, the State proved up the charge as contained in said indictment, and the jury found the defendant guilty as charged; and…
1Opinion of the Court
Napton J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
The 19th section of the 3rd article of an act concerning Practice and Pro. in criminal cases, provides that “no indictment can be found without the concurrence of at least twelve grand jurors; when so found, and not otherwise, the foreman of the grand jury shall certify under his hand, that such indictment is a true bill.” The indictment, upon which Mertens was tried and convicted, was endorsed “a true bill,” by the foreman of the grand jury, but not signed by him. The question is, did this omission destroy the legality of the whole proceedings…
2Cited by12 opinions
- State v. HaysSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- State v. ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1853
- People v. LawrenceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- State v. ElginSupreme Court of Missouri · 1965
- State v. LoganSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1900
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.