State v. Eisenhart.
| Decision Date | 09 May 1927 |
| Docket Number | No. 15810.,15810. |
| Citation | 294 S.W. 422 |
| Parties | STATE v. EISENHART. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Morgan County; H. J. Westheus, Judge.
"Not to be officially published."
Herman Eisenhart was convicted of unlawfully possessing mash tubs, a worm, still, and sugar fit for use in the unlawful manufacture or production of intoxicating liquor, and he appeals. Affirmed.
C. I. Bennington, of Sedalia, for appellant.
John J. Jones, of Versailles, for the State.
The defendant was convicted on an information charging him with willfully and unlawfully having in his possession and upon his premises ten mash tubs, a worm, still, and sugar fit for use in the unlawful manufacture or production of intoxicating liquor, in violation of section 2, p. 237, Laws of Missouri 1923, and his punishment was assessed at $250. The record shows that the verdict of the jury was returned and judgment rendered thereon on December 10, 1924. On the following day, December 11, 1924, motion for new trial was filed.
The statute requires the motion for new trial in a criminal case to be filed before judgment. Section 4079, R. S. 1919. This statute is mandatory. The motion for new trial having been filed after judgment, the case is here on the record proper. State v. Huffman (Mo. Sup.) 267 S. W. 838; State v. Baker (Mo. Sup.) 274 S. W. 359, and cases cited.
Defendant made no objection or exception to the action of the court in rendering judgment on the verdict before the motion for new trial was filed. In the absence of an objection or exception by defendant to the court's action in rendering judgment on the same day verdict was returned, motion for new trial thereafter filed is out of time. State v. Dunnegan, 258 Mo. 373, 167 S. W. 497; State v. Sparks, 263 Mo. 609, 173 S. W. 1057; State v. Fraser, 220 Mo. 34, 119 S. W. 389; State v. Nistendirk (Mo. App.) 204 S. W. 1111.
This brings us to a consideration of the record proper. The pertinent part of the statute under which the information was drawn is as follows:
"* * * And if any person shall have any such still, worm, double (r), or other equipment, or utensil whatsoever, fit for use in the distilling, brewing or manufacturing, of any intoxicating liquors, now in violation of this act, or any other law of this state, and shall not have used the same in brewing, or the manufacture of any such intoxicating liquor, he shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars, nor more than one thousand dollars, and by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Porter
... ... Selleck (Mo ... Sup.) 46 S.W.2d 570(1); State v. Baird, 297 Mo ... 219, 225 (2), 248 S.W. 596, 598 (3)], or the day following ... [State v. Letney (Mo. Sup.) 300 S.W. 674(2); ... State v. Graham, 301 Mo. 272, 274, 256 S.W. 770, 771 ... (2); State v. Eisenhart (Mo. App.) 294 S.W. 422, 423 ... (13)], have been held filed too late for consideration. And ... see, among others, State v. Sparks, 263 Mo. 609, 613 ... (2), 173 S.W. 1057 (3); State v. McSame (Mo. Sup.) ... 267 S.W. 888 (1). This, too, notwithstanding the fact the ... record discloses that ... ...
-
State v. Porter
...day following [State v. Letney (Mo. Sup.) 300 S. W. 674 (2); State v. Graham, 301 Mo. 272, 274, 256 S. W. 770, 771 (2); State v. Eisenhart (Mo. App.) 294 S. W. 422, 423 (1-3)], have been held filed too late for consideration. And see, among others, State v. Sparks, 263 Mo. 609, 613 (2), 173......
-
Waller v. Mortz
... ... Rogers v. Turner, 59 Mo. 116. The basis of the father's liability for necessaries furnished his child is not clear in the state of Missouri, but it is well established that, where a father wholly neglects to support his child, as appears in this case, he is liable to third ... ...
-
State v. Legan
... ... before the motion for a new trial was filed. Under this ... condition of the record, the trial court cannot be convicted ... of error in failing to grant allocution to the appellant ... State v. Turner (Mo. Sup.) 273 S.W. 739; State ... v. Eisenhart (Mo. App.) 294 S.W. 422 ... Section ... 3735, R. S. (Mo.) 1929 (Mo. St. Ann. § 3735, p. 3275), ... provides that motion for a new trial must be filed before ... judgment. 'The record must affirmatively show that the ... motion for new trial was filed in time.' State v. La ... ...