Legal Opinion

State v. Hughes

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided April 15, 1884PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. — Hon. "W". H. Sherman, Judge. The omission to lay the venue of the offense in the indictment is cured by the statute of jeofails. It provides that “ no indictment or information shall be deemed invalid, nor shall the trial, judgment or other proceedings thereon be stayed, arrested or in any manner affected; * * for want of a proper or perfect venue; nor for want of any venue at all.”

Read the full summary

Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. — Hon. "W". H. Sherman, Judge. The omission to lay the venue of the offense in the indictment is cured by the statute of jeofails. It provides that “ no indictment or information shall be deemed invalid, nor shall the trial, judgment or other proceedings thereon be stayed, arrested or in any manner affected; * * for want of a proper or perfect venue; nor for want of any venue at all.” R. S. 1879, § 1821. Nor does the failure to. allege the time of the commission of the offense invalidate the indictment. Time was not of the essence of the offense. R. S.…

1Opinion of the Court

Philips, C.

On the 5th day of July, 1880, the defendant, with others, was indicted in the Buchanan circuit court for disturbing the peace of a neighborhood. The indictment is as follows : “ The grand jurors of the state of Missouri, within and for the body of the county of Buchanan being duly empanelled and sworn, do present that Robert Hughes (naming the other indictees) did unlawfully and willfully disturb the peace of a neighborhood by loud and unusual noises, by quarreling and fighting, and by loud, indecent and offensive conversation contrary, etc." On trial had at the July term, 1881,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. BabbSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
  2. State v. MagrathSupreme Court of Missouri · 1854
  3. State v. BurgessSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
  4. State v. FindleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
  5. State v. SchienemanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. TurlingtonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
  2. State v. DimmickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
  3. Flores v. City and County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1950
  4. State v. McDonoughSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
  5. Chandler v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1889

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API