State v. Matthews
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from, Crawford Circuit Court. Indictment for hog stealing. The indictment contained three counts. The first count charged that the defendant, on, &c., with, &c., at, &c., “ one hog of the value of five dollars, the personal property of Eli Wilson and Wm. Halliburton, then and there being found, then and there feloniously did steal, take and carry away, contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Crawford Circuit Court. Indictment for hog stealing. The indictment contained three counts. The first count charged that the defendant, on, &c., with, &c., at, &c., “ one hog of the value of five dollars, the personal property of Eli Wilson and Wm. Halliburton, then and there being found, then and there feloniously did steal, take and carry away, contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided.” The second count charged that the defendant, on, &c., with, &e., at, &c., “ one hog of the value of five dollars, of the personal property of Eli Wilson and Wm.…
1Opinion of the CourtRyland, Judge
I. The record of the proceedings of the Circuit Court in this case shows that the trial was had, and the defendant found guilty of grand larceny, without his having ever pleaded to the indictment or been arraigned in court. Indeed, no issue was presented for trial by the record, as certified to this court. The first time the defendant is mentioned as being in court is after the verdict of guilty has been rendered by the jury. He then is brought up in the custody of the sheriff to hear his sentence. There is such manifest error in the proceedings below, apparent *57on the record, that the…
2Cited by33 opinions
- State v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- State v. GadwoodSupreme Court of Missouri · 1938
- Lacefield v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1879
- State v. ConwaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1912
- State v. YoungSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.