McLean v. State
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to St. Louis Criminal Court. POINTS AND AUTHORITIES. 1. The court should have continued the trial of said cause until the January-term, the affidavit of the said McLean, for that purpose, being entirely sufficient, and containing every allegation required by statute.
Read the full summary
ERROR to St. Louis Criminal Court. POINTS AND AUTHORITIES. 1. The court should have continued the trial of said cause until the January-term, the affidavit of the said McLean, for that purpose, being entirely sufficient, and containing every allegation required by statute. And, by reference to the testimony of Rucker, Coyers, and Hugh Rogers, the materiality of the testimony of Brown, on the account of whose testimony the motion was made, is apparent, and corroborates the truth of the affidavit. — People vs. Vermyllea, 7 Cow. 525; 6 Cow. Rep., 577; 5 Cow. Rep., 15. 2. The jury, after they are…
1Opinion of the CourtTompkins, Judge
At the September term of the Criminal Court for St. Louis county, the appellant, James McLean, was indicted for murder in the first degree, and at the November term of that court, next succeeding, he was tried and found guilty.
To reverse the judgment of the Criminal Court, this appeal is prosecuted.
In the bill of exceptions, it appears, that during the said term of November, to wit, on the 12th day of December, 1842, bo prayed a continuance of his cause, and at the same time filed his affidavit, that one James Brown is a material witness for him, the defendant, and that he could not safely go…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. HadleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1991
- State v. MurraySupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- State ex rel. Hensick v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1878