State v. Gilmore
| Decision Date | 11 January 1888 |
| Citation | 28 Mo.App. 561 |
| Parties | STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent, v. MICHAEL GILMORE, Appellant. |
| Court | Kansas Court of Appeals |
APPEAL from Jackson Criminal Court, HON. HENRY P. WHITE, Judge.
Transferred to Supreme Court.
The case is stated in the opinion.
Defendant was indicted at the November term, 1886, of the Jackson criminal court, under section 1547, Revised Statutes, Acts, 1881, page 112, commonly known as the " Johnson Gambling Law." He was convicted and his punishment assessed at six months in the county jail, from which he appeals to this court. It is declared by the section referred to, that whoever shall " be convicted of any of the offences therein named, shall be adjudged guilty of a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term not less than two nor more than five years; or by imprisonment in the county jail for a term not less than six nor more than twelve months." Our statutory definition of a felony is " any offence for which the offender, on conviction, shall be liable by law, to be punished with death or imprisonment in the penitentiary." Rev. Stat., sec. 1676. A misdemeanor by the same statute (sec. 1678) includes offences " punishable only by fine or imprisonment in the county jail, or both." From these sections, 1676 and 1678, it is evident that the defendant has been convicted of a felony, for the reason that the offence was one for which he was " liable" to be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary. The fact that he was, in this case, actually punished by imprisonment in the county jail does not alter the matter; he was liable to a punishment of imprisonment in the penitentiary, and the punishment prescribed for his offence was not fine or imprisonment in the county jail " " only." But aside from these sections, the statute defining the offence declares its commission to be a felony without regard to the punishment which may be inflicted.
There is no doubt of the want of jurisdiction in this court, under section 12, article 6, of the constitution, and we, therefore, order the cause transferred to the Supreme Court of the state.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Butler v. Foster
... ... Feaslor, 25 Mo ... 324; State v. McCorron, 51 Mo. 27; State v ... Green, 66 Mo. 631; State v. Weldon, 70 Mo. 572; ... State v. Reeves, 97 Mo. 688; State v ... Clayton, 100 Mo. 516; State v. Bockstruck, 136 ... Mo. 335; State v. Greenspan, 137 Mo. 149; State ... v. Gilmore, 28 Mo.App. 561; State v. Melton, 53 ... Mo.App. 646, 117 Mo.App. 618; State v. Nicholson, 56 ... Mo.App. 412. (2) To ascertain the intention of lawmakers is ... the goal of all interpretation, and "in construing ... statutes, penal as well as others, an interpretation must ... never be ... ...
-
The State v. Zinn
...of the crime. If it be a felony, it has jurisdiction. Article VI, sec. 12, State Constitution; State v. McNeary, 88 Mo. 143; State v. Gilmore, 28 Mo.App. 561; State Lehr, 16 Mo.App. 491. If a misdemeanor, the courts of appeal have jurisdiction. It follows that this court has no jurisdiction......
-
State v. Sparks
...889; State v. Melton, 53 Mo.App. 646; State v. Herrick, 158 Mo.App. 487, 139 S.W. 258; State v. Zinn, 141 Mo. 329, 42 S.W. 938; State v. Gilmore, 28 Mo.App. 561.] In the Woodson case, supra, the Supreme Court merely that in a certain class of cases, like assaults and larceny, our statute ma......
-
The State v. Melton
...sec. 5), and this is a felony case. State v. Clayton, 100 Mo. 516; State v. Deffenbacher, 51 Mo. 26; State v. Green, 66 Mo. 631; State v. Gilmore, 28 Mo.App. 561. (3) the motion for a new trial, nor in arrest, are contained in the bill of exceptions, nor is there any direction therein to th......