State v. Lewis
Missouri Court of Appeals
.Appeal from the Buchanan Criminal Court.—Hon. Silas Woodson, Judge. (1) Fulton appeared in the justice’s court on December 28, 1893. That was a compliance with the obligations of the bond and discharged the security. State v. Bobb, 39 Mo.
Read the full summary
.Appeal from the Buchanan Criminal Court.—Hon. Silas Woodson, Judge. (1) Fulton appeared in the justice’s court on December 28, 1893. That was a compliance with the obligations of the bond and discharged the security. State v. Bobb, 39 Mo. App. 543; State v. Mackey, 55-Mo. 51; R. S. 1889, sec. 4339. (2) The terms of the-bond requiring the defendant Fulton to “personally appear on any and every day and time to which said cause against him may be adjourned or continued and not thence depart without leave,” are not provided for by statute, are mere surplusage and do not bind the security.…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
—This case so closely resembles that of State v. Bobb, 39 Mo. App. 543, that the facts there stated will suffice for this.
The question here, as there, is whether the recital of a condition in the recognizance, in excess of the authority conferred upon justices of the peace . by section 4339, Revised Statutes, is obligatory upon the surety. ' It was there held that the words of the recognizance enlarging or extending the conditions thereof beyond those authorized by the section of the statutes just referred to, were mere surplusage, and ineffectual to bind the surety.
The condition of the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Werner v. Citizens' Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Dillard v. Louis, Kansas City & Northern R. Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- State v. BobbMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
3Cited by4 opinions
- City of St. Louis v. YoungSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- Howlett v. TurnerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- People v. EberlieSupreme Court of Colorado · 1915
- State v. BergerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1918