State v. Baird

Decision Date23 February 1923
Docket NumberNo. 24102.,24102.
Citation297 Mo. 219,248 S.W. 596
PartiesSTATE v. BAIRD.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Christian County; C. II. Skinker, Judge.

Stanley Baird was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.

G. Purd Hays, of Ozark, Rufe Scott, of Galena, W. L. Vandeventer, of Hartville, and Robt. L. Gideon, of Forsyth, for appellant.

Jesse W. Barrett, Atty. Gen., and J. Henry Caruthers, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

DAVIS, C.

The prosecuting attorney of Stone county, by information filed on the _______ day of July, 1921, charged defendant and Gip Webster with murder in the first degree. On a change of venue to Christian county, defendant was, on the 16th day of September, 1921, convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, for that, on March 9, 1921, he mortally wounded by a pistol shot James A. Crabtree, who subsequently died.

The information, omitting caption and verification, is as follows:

"W. E. Renfro, prosecuting attorney, within and for the county of Stone, in the state of Missouri, informs the court on his oath of office and to the best of his knowledge, information and belief that Stanley Baird and Gip Webster, on or about the 9th day of March, 1921, at the said county of Stone, in and upon one James A. Crabtree, then and there being, feloniously, willfully, deliberately, premeditatedly and of their malice aforethought, did make an assault and a dangerous and deadly weapon, to wit, a pistol then and there loaded with gunpowder and leaden balls, which they, the said Stanley Baird and Gip Webster, in their hands then and there had and held, at and against him, the said James A. Crabtree, then and there feloniously, on purpose and of their malice aforethought, willfully, deliberately and premeditatedly, did shoot off and discharge, and with the pistol aforesaid, and the leaden balls aforesaid, then and there feloniously, on purpose and of their malice aforethought, willfully, deliberately and premeditatedly, did shoot and strike him, the said James A. Crabtree, in and upon the body of him, the said James A. Crabtree, giving to him, the said James A. Crabtree, then and there with the dangerous and deadly weapon, to wit, the pistol aforesaid, in and upon the body of him, the said James A. Crabtree, one mortal wound, of which mortal wound the said James A. Crabtree, from the 9th day of March, 1921, until the 11th day of March, 1921, at the county aforesaid, did languish, and languishing did live, on which said 11th day of March, 1921, the said James A. Crabtree, at the county of Stone aforesaid, of the mortal wound aforesaid, died, and W. E. Renfro, prosecuting attorney aforesaid, upon his oath of office aforesaid, does say that the said Stanley Baird and Gip Webster, him the said James A. Crabtree, in the manner and by the means aforesaid, feloniously, willfully, deliberately, premeditatedly and of their malice aforethought did kill and murder; against the peace and dignity of the state.

                                        "W. E. Renfro, Prosecuting Attorney."
                

On September 16, 1921, the jury returned in open court the following verdict:

"We, the jury, find the defendant, Stanley Baird, guilty as charged in the information, of murder in the first degree and assess his punishment at imprisonment in the state penitentiary for the term of his natural life.

                                        "T. G. Ladd, Foreman."
                

The record proper shows the following entries relative to the judgment, sentence, motion for a new trial and motion in arrest of judgment, to wit:

"State of Missouri, Plaintiff, 109-v-1191 Stanley Baird, Defendant, Murder. Sentence and Judgment. Now, at this 16th day of September, A. D. 1921, same being the eleventh judicial day of the regular September term, 1921, comes the prosecuting attorney for, the state, and also comes the defendant herein, in person, in the custody of the sheriff of this county, in the presence of his attorney and counsel in open court, whereupon the said defendant is informed by the court that he has been found guilty of murder in the first degree by a jury, and punishment assessed at imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a term of his natural life, and being now asked by the court if he had any legal cause to show why judgment should not be pronounced against him according to law, and still failing to show cause, it is therefore sentenced, ordered, and adjudged by the court that the said defendant, Stanley Baird, having been found guilty as aforesaid, be confined in the penitentiary of the state of Missouri for a period of his natural life, from the 16th day of September, 1921, and that the sheriff of this county shall, without delay, remove and safely convey the said defendant to the said penitentiary, there to be kept, confined, and treated in the manner directed by law, and the said defendant, in the state penitentiary aforesaid, until the judgment and sentence of the court herein be complied with, or until the said defendant shall be otherwise discharged by due course of law. It is further considered, ordered, and adjudged by the court that the state have and recover of said defendant the costs in this suit expended, and that execution hereof issue therefor.

"Afterwards, on the same day comes the defendant, by his attorney, and files herein his motion praying the court to set aside its judgment in the above cause and grant him a new trial, and the court having seen, heard, and fully understood said motion and having been fully advised in the premises doth overrule same. At the same day comes the defendant herein, by his attorney, and files herein his motion, praying the court to arrest and set aside its judgment, cause shown, and the court, having seen, heard, and fully understood said motion, and having been fully advised in the premises, doth overrule same."

Opinion.

Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the information because (1) it charges no offense under the laws of the state of Missouri; (2) it is vague, indefinite, and so disconnected that it does not legally inform the defendant of the accusations against him; (3) the word "with" is omitted.

The third, which probably includes the second challenge, is directed to that part of the information as follows: "* * * Did make an assault and a dangerous and deadly weapon, to wit. * * *" It is the contention of defendant that the information should read "did make an assault with a dangerous and deadly weapon." Construing the information, we do not find it to be vague, indefinite, or disconnected, or that the word "with" was omitted. That part of the information under...

To continue reading

Request your trial
57 cases
  • State v. Dimmick
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • September 28, 1932
    ...bill of exceptions. The assignment is, therefore, not open to consideration. [State v. Gamble, 119 Mo. 427, 430, 24 S.W. 1030, 1031; State v. Baird, supra, 297 Mo. l. c. 227, 248 S.W. l. c. 598; State Ball, 321 Mo. 1171, 1185, 12 S.W.2d 638, 643.] III. The record recites the jury returned i......
  • State v. Jackson
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 7, 1939
    ...p. 446; State v. Musick, 101 Mo. 260; 30 C. J., sec. 641, p. 396; State v. McKenzie, 177 Mo. 699; State v. Kauffman, 329 Mo. 813; State v. Baird, 297 Mo. 219. McKittrick, Attorney General, and Wm. Orr Sawyers, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent. (1) There was no error in refusing to......
  • Marsden v. Nipp
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 3, 1930
    ...a bill of exceptions to permit an appellate court to review such assignments of error. [Hart's Adm. v. Walker, 31 Mo. 26; State v. Baird, 297 Mo. 219, 248 S.W. 596.] Defendants present that the evidence does not substantively or sufficiently show that the trustee, A. O. White, was permanent......
  • State v. Pinkard
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 12, 1927
    ... ... this charge, though such fact did not appear in evidence. We ... find nothing in the record to support this assertion and it ... will, therefore, be disregarded. Mere assertions in a motion ... for a new trial do not prove themselves. [State v ... Baird, 297 Mo. 219, 248 S.W. 596; State v ... Creeley, 254 Mo. 382, 162 S.W. 737.] ...           [318 ... Mo. 761] V. The information is sufficient in form and ... substance. [State v. Payne, 194 Mo. 442, 92 S.W ... 461; State v. Neal, 178 Mo. 63, 76 S.W. 958.] ...          VI ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT