State v. Napper
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Dunklin Circuit Court. — Hon. John Gr. Wear, Judge. (1) The statute fully defines the offense and the indictment should follow the statute.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Dunklin Circuit Court. — Hon. John Gr. Wear, Judge. (1) The statute fully defines the offense and the indictment should follow the statute. State v. McDaniel, 94 Mo. 301; State v. Kirby, 115 Mo. 440. (2) The court erred in permitting counsel for the State to propound to the witness, Virginia Richardson, leading questions, as follows: — “I will ask you if, while you were at his place, you were not under his care and protection?” A. “Yes, sir; he was my protector, as I thought.” Q. “I will ask you if he said to you that if you would go with him and live with him he would be a father…
1Opinion of the Court
IN DIVISION TWO.
Buboess, J.
— At the July term, 1895, of the circuit court of Dunklin county, the defendant was indicted by the grand jury of that county, and charged with defiling, debauching, and carnally knowing one Virginia Richardson, a femále under the age of eighteen years, who was alleged to have been confided to his *404care and protection. At the March term of said court next following, he was put upon his trial, .found guilty as, charged, and his punishment fixed at nine months’ imprisonment in the county jail and a fine of $500. Defendant then filed his motion for a new trial, which…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. StrattmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- State v. WertzSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- State v. BatemanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- State v. SummarSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- State v. HyderSupreme Court of Missouri · 1914
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.