State v. Gerber
| Decision Date | 31 October 1883 |
| Citation | 80 Mo. 94 |
| Parties | THE STATE v. GERBER, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court.--HON. J. L. THOMAS, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
T. H. McMullin for appellant.
D. H. McIntyre, Attorney General, for the State.
The defendant was indicted in the circuit court of Jefferson county for selling fermented liquors on Sunday. He was tried by the court without the aid of a jury, by consent of parties, and was found guilty and fined. The defendant has appealed, but has filed no brief. No question was made in the court below as to the sufficiency of the indictment, and it is only necessary to say that we regard it as sufficient.
It appears from the record that the defendant, who was a farmer, had wine in his possession which he had made “on the shares,” from grapes belonging to one Roe Whitehead; that he had disposed of his own share, but still had Whitehead's share, he having left it with the defendant with instructions to sell it for him, or to deliver it to any one whom he might send for it. The prosecuting witness testified that at the request of several youths who were assembled at the house of a friend who was living on a farm which belonged to Roe Whitehead, he went to the house of defendant on Sunday, to obtain a gallon of wine. He told the defendant he had been sent by the boys, giving the names of several, among them the names of two who were nephews of Whitehead. The defendant delivered him a gallon of wine, and the prosecuting witness remarked, as he went to his horse: “The boys will settle for it, with you.” The defendant replied “all right,” and afterward said: “I don't sell wine on Sunday.”
The defendant testified that he delivered the wine “supposing the boys had sent after it with Roe's knowledge.” Defendant further testified that he did not sell the wine; that he received no pay, and neither agreed or expected to receive pay for the wine from any one, either for himself or for Whitehead, but gave it to the prosecuting witness, “supposing that he had been sent for it by the boys on Whitehead's farm, with his knowledge.”
The court declared the law as follows: “If the court sitting as a jury shall find from the evidence in this cause that defendant, Louis Gerber, in Jefferson county, Missouri, a any time within one year next before the finding of the indictment in this cause, on the first day of the week called Sunday, did sell and dispose of, to Willie Buren, one gallon of wine with the understanding that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Buechler
... ... Railroad, 60 ... Mo. 199. (3) The court erred in instructing the jury that ... they mightfind the defendant guilty of an offense under ... Revised Statutes, 1879, section 1263. State v ... Wilson, 86 Mo. 520; State v. Green, 66 Mo. 631; ... State v. Degonia, 69 Mo. 485; State v ... Gerber, 80 Mo. 94. (4) The court erred in the ... instruction as to the credibility of the witnesses. State ... v. Mix, 15 Mo. 153; State v. Brown, 64 Mo. 367; ... State v. Elkins, 63 Mo. 159; State v ... Stout, 31 Mo. 406; State v. Cushing, 29 Mo. 215 ... John M ... Wood, ... ...
-
The State v. Lewis
... ... testimony. No rule is better settled in this state than that ... no instruction should ever be given that is not supported and ... authorized by the evidence. State v. Chambers, 87 ... Mo. 406; State v. Thompson, 83 Mo. 257; State v ... Gerber, 80 Mo. 94; State v. Parker, 106 Mo ... 225; State v. Bulling, 105 Mo. 220; State v ... Herrell, 97 Mo. 106; State v. McKinzie, 102 Mo ... 620; State v. Degonia, 69 Mo. 485. (3) The ninth ... instruction given upon the part of the state clearly defines ... the law as to self-defense, and is ... ...
-
State v. Harrod
...kill on part of the defendant and his sons, and, therefore, instruction, numbered 13, was erroneous. State v. Thompson, 83 Mo. 257; State v. Gerber, 80 Mo. 94. (4) The court erred refusing to give the jury instruction, numbered 5, asked by defendant on the question of self-defense. There wa......
-
State v. Berkley
...of these instructions was error; there was no evidence in the case upon which to predicate them. State v. Thompson, 83 Mo. 257; State v. Gerber, 80 Mo. 94; State v. Degonia, 69 485. John M. Wood, Attorney General, for the State. (1) The court did not err in overruling the motion to quash th......