Legal Opinion

Barada v. State

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided January 15, 1850PublishedCited by 9 opinions

APPEAL FROM BUCHAHAN CIRCUIT COURT. This is an indictment against the defendants, and one other person jointly, for permitting gaming in a building of which they had the possession and control. The defendants were found guilty by a jury, and a joint flue of fifty dollars was assessed against them. 1. The verdict and judgment of the court below, are joint against both defendants, when they should have been several and separate against each defendant. 10 Mo.

Read the full summary

APPEAL FROM BUCHAHAN CIRCUIT COURT. This is an indictment against the defendants, and one other person jointly, for permitting gaming in a building of which they had the possession and control. The defendants were found guilty by a jury, and a joint flue of fifty dollars was assessed against them. 1. The verdict and judgment of the court below, are joint against both defendants, when they should have been several and separate against each defendant. 10 Mo. R. 440, State v. Gay et al. 2. The offense in the indictment, must he proved as laid. Archbold’s Grim. PI. 98-9. The evidence does not…

1Opinion of the CourtRyland, J.

This was an indictment against the defendants, Edmund Barada, Isidore Barada and Alexander Constant, for keeping a gaming-house, &e., found by the grand jury in Buchanan county, at the March term, 1848, of the Circuit Court for said county. The defendants were arrested, and at the March'term, 1849, were tried upon the indictment, to which they had plead not guilty. The jury found the defendants, Edmund and Isidore Barada, guilty, and the defendant, Constant, not guilty. The jury assessed the fine of fifty dollars against the two Baradas. They afterwards moved for a new trial and in arrest of…

2Cited by9 opinions

  1. Coleman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1911
  2. State v. ThornhillSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
  3. People v. BurridgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  4. May v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Ex parte BernertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881

4 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