State v. Nicholas
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Pemiscot Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry C. Riley, Judge. (1) This information fails to lay the offense within the' time limited by law, and on, the trial the State failed to show facts which would bring the prosecution within the exception of the Statute of Limitations, and is, therefore bad, and is barred by the statute.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pemiscot Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry C. Riley, Judge. (1) This information fails to lay the offense within the' time limited by law, and on, the trial the State failed to show facts which would bring the prosecution within the exception of the Statute of Limitations, and is, therefore bad, and is barred by the statute. State v. English, 2 Mo. 182; State v. Meyers, 68 Mo. 268. (2) The court erred,in admitting incompetent, immaterial, irrelevant and illegal testimony. Art. 2, sec. 22, Const, of Mo.; State v. Williford, 111' Mo. App. 668; Ex parte Bedard, 106 Mo. 624; State v.…
1Opinion of the CourtNixon, P. J.
This was a prosecution under section 2175, R. S. 1899, and the case has once been before the St. Louis Court of Appeals. [State v. Nicholas, 124 Mo. App. 330, 101 S. W. 618.] It was there held that defendants’ motion to quash the information should have been sustained, and the judgment was accordingly reversed and the cause remanded with directions to the circuit court to set aside its order overruling defendants’ motion to quash the information and to grant the prosecuting attorney leave to file an amended information if he should be so advised. On the 17th day of July, 1907, the following…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State v. McO'BlenisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1857
- Summons v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1856
- State v. HouserSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
- People v. WittyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Sneed v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. NicholasMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912