State v. Feazell
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Writing for the Court | Burgess |
Citation | 33 S.W. 788,132 Mo. 176 |
Parties | STATE v. FEAZELL. |
Decision Date | 21 January 1896 |
v.
FEAZELL.
INDICTMENT — DESCRIPTION OF MONEY.
A description in an indictment of money as "$45 in money, of the value of $45," is sufficient; Rev. St. 1889, § 4111, providing that it shall be sufficient for an indictment making an averment as to money made or issued by a bank incorporated by law, or made or issued by virtue of any law of the United States, to describe it simply as money, without specifying any particular coin or note.
Appeal from circuit court, Jasper county; Edward C. Crow, Judge.
An indictment against Robert Feazell was quashed, and the state appeals. Reversed.
The defendant was indicted in the circuit court of Jasper county under section 3564, Rev. St. 1889, for obtaining money under false pretenses. A motion to quash the indictment was sustained by the trial court, and the only question to be considered here is the sufficiency of the indictment, which, omitting the formal parts, is as follows:
"One Robert Feazell, intending, designing, and contriving to cheat and defraud one Arch King of his money, goods, wares, and merchandise, and with the view and intent to effect the loan hereinafter mentioned, did then and there designedly, feloniously, falsely, and fraudulently pretend and represent to the said Arch King that he, the said Robert Feazell, was then and there in good, solvent circumstances, and then and there the sole and absolute owner, free of all incumbrances, of the following described property, goods and chattels, to wit, one 50 horse power boiler, one 30 horse power engine, one crusher and rolls, one 10-inch lift pump, and one friction hoister, and that said machinery was then and there all located on lot 14 on the Lewelling lease in West Hollow, in Jasper county, state of Missouri; and that a certain written instrument which he, the said Robert Feazell, by the name and style of R. Feazell, then made, executed, and delivered to the said Arch King for the pretended purpose of securing the repayment of the said loan, was then and there a genuine and valid written instrument of security, and was then and there a good, genuine, and valid bill of sale and conveyance of the property, goods, and chattels hereinbefore mentioned and described, which said written instrument was in words and figures and of the tenor as follows, to wit:
"`Wm. Guengerich. Robert Guengerich. "`W. Guengerich & Bro., Dealers in General Hardware, Stoves, Tinware, Miners' Supplies, etc. "`No. 415 Main Street. "`Joplin, Mo., May 10, 1895.
"`This is to certify that I have this day bargained and sold to Arch King all my right, title, and interest in the following described property, to wit: one fifty horse power boiler, one thirty horse power engine, one crusher and rolls, one ten-inch lift pump, one belt friction hoister, for value received. If the said R. Feazell pays back to Arch King the sum of $47 (forty-seven dollars) on or before the 20th day of May, then this shall be null and void. If not paid by the time mentioned, then this shall remain in full force and effect. Said machinery is located on lot 14, on the Lewelling lease, in
West Hollow. R. Feazell.'
"And the said Arch King, then and there believing the said false and fraudulent pretenses and representations so made as aforesaid to be true, and believing...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Pryor, 35954
...(3 Ed.), sec. 609, pp. 536-7; Jane v. State, 3 Mo. 45; State v. Murdock, 9 Mo. 739; State v. Defenbacher, 51 Mo. 26; State v. Feazell, 132 Mo. 176; State v. McGrath, 228 Mo. 413; State v. Dixon, 247 Mo. 668; State v. Siegel, 265 Mo. 239; State v. Muir, 186 S.W. 1047; State v. Bennett, 297 M......
-
State v. Foley
...151, 70 S. W. 477; State v. Vandenburg, 159 Mo. 230, 60 S. W. 79; State v. Clay, 100 Mo. 571, 13 S. W. 827; State v. Feazell, 132 Mo. 178, 33 S. W. 788; State v. Turley, 142 Mo. 406, 44 S. W. 267; State v. Dines, 206 Mo. 653, 105 S. W. 722; State v. Roberts, 201 Mo. 710, 100 S. W. 484. It i......
-
State v. Young, 19295.
...induced to and did part with his property (State v. Vorback, 66 Mo. 168; State v. Donaldson, 243 Mo. 460, 148 S. W. 79; State v. Feazell, 132 Mo. 176, 33 S. W. 788; State v. Dines, 206 Mo. 649, 105 S. W. 722; State v. Hubbard, 170 Mo. 346, 70 S. W. 883; State v. Kelly, 170 Mo. 151, 70 S. W.......
-
The State v. Eisenhour
...second instructions given in behalf of the state are not justified by the law of the case. The instructions are in accord with the law as [33 S.W. 788] announced by this court in repeated adjudications, and are without exception. State v. Wheeler, 108 Mo. 658, 18 S.W. 924; State v. McCaskey......
-
State v. Pryor, 35954
...(3 Ed.), sec. 609, pp. 536-7; Jane v. State, 3 Mo. 45; State v. Murdock, 9 Mo. 739; State v. Defenbacher, 51 Mo. 26; State v. Feazell, 132 Mo. 176; State v. McGrath, 228 Mo. 413; State v. Dixon, 247 Mo. 668; State v. Siegel, 265 Mo. 239; State v. Muir, 186 S.W. 1047; State v. Bennett, 297 M......
-
State v. Foley
...151, 70 S. W. 477; State v. Vandenburg, 159 Mo. 230, 60 S. W. 79; State v. Clay, 100 Mo. 571, 13 S. W. 827; State v. Feazell, 132 Mo. 178, 33 S. W. 788; State v. Turley, 142 Mo. 406, 44 S. W. 267; State v. Dines, 206 Mo. 653, 105 S. W. 722; State v. Roberts, 201 Mo. 710, 100 S. W. 484. It i......
-
State v. Young, 19295.
...induced to and did part with his property (State v. Vorback, 66 Mo. 168; State v. Donaldson, 243 Mo. 460, 148 S. W. 79; State v. Feazell, 132 Mo. 176, 33 S. W. 788; State v. Dines, 206 Mo. 649, 105 S. W. 722; State v. Hubbard, 170 Mo. 346, 70 S. W. 883; State v. Kelly, 170 Mo. 151, 70 S. W.......
-
The State v. Eisenhour
...second instructions given in behalf of the state are not justified by the law of the case. The instructions are in accord with the law as [33 S.W. 788] announced by this court in repeated adjudications, and are without exception. State v. Wheeler, 108 Mo. 658, 18 S.W. 924; State v. McCaskey......