State v. Horn
| Decision Date | 28 November 1887 |
| Citation | 6 S.W. 96,93 Mo. 190 |
| Parties | STATE v. HORN. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis criminal court; G. S. VAN WAGONER, Judge.
Jos. G. Dodge, for appellant. The Attorney General, for the State.
This prosecution was instituted under the provisions of section 1561, Rev. St. 1879. Here is the indictment: "The grand jurors of the state of Missouri, within and for the body of the city of St. Louis, now here in court, duly impaneled, sworn, and charged, upon their oath present that Samuel H. Horn, late of the city of St. Louis, aforesaid, and state aforesaid, on the twenty-seventh day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-four, at the city of St. Louis, aforesaid, did unlawfully and feloniously, with intent to cheat and defraud, obtain from one John F. Adams one hundred and fifty dollars, lawful money of the United States of America, of the value of one hundred and fifty dollars, the money and property of said John F. Adams, by means and by use of a false and fraudulent representation, pretense, and statement, contrary to the form of statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the state." I have italicized the names alleged in the indictment as those of the defendant, and of his alleged victim, because on the trial the evidence showed that the Christian name of the defendant was Sidney, and that of Adams, Joseph.
At the close of the evidence for the prosecution, the defendant demurred to it because of the variances aforesaid; but the trial court overruled the demurrer, and instructed the jury that such variances were immaterial. This ruling brings into prominence the sufficiency of the indictment, considered with reference to the section of the statute upon which it is drawn. The rule is a familiar one that indictments based upon statutes must conform to the statutes on which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Quinn
... ... the "Form" of the Information, which is not ... permissible under the law; and, Fifth, because the amended ... information was not sworn to, and was not supported, as ... amended, by the complaint. State v. Smith, 264 S.W ... 52; State v. Fox, 300 S.W. 820; State v ... Horn, 93 Mo. 190; Sec. 3554, R. S. 1929; State v ... Clark, 223 Mo. 48, 122 S.W. 665; State v ... Roswell, 153 Mo.App. 338, 133 S.W. 99; State v ... Jenkins, 92 Mo.App. 439; State v. Walton, 255 ... Mo. 232, 164 S.W. 211. (6) The information wholly failed to ... allege the necessary facts to ... ...
-
State v. Fraker
... ... for obtaining or attempting to obtain any given thing ... [ Queen v. Sowerby (1894), 2 Q. B. 173; In re ... Schurman, 20 P. 277; People v. Cline, 44 Mich ... 290, 6 N.W. 671; 2 Bishop New Cr. Proc., sec. 173; State ... v. Horn, 93 Mo. 190, 6 S.W. 96.] ... And ... surely the mere allegation that defendant "pretended to ... fall and fell in the Missouri river" would not ... constitute an offense in Ray county. In order that the ... indictment should be sufficient in this regard, it should ... ...
-
Lazar v. State
...indictment. In a number of cases, including State v. Fancher, 1880, 71 Mo. 460; State v. McChesney, 90 Mo. 120, 1 S.W. 841; State v. Horn, 93 Mo. 190, 6 S.W. 96, and State v. Sarony, 95 Mo. 349, 8 S.W. 407, the Supreme Court of Missouri held the original Act constitutional, but in 1892 in t......
-
State v. Price, 42288
...State v. Craig, 328 Mo. 938, 43 S.W.2d 413, and State v. Herman, Mo.Sup., 162 S.W.2d 873. They are not in point. He also cites State v. Horn, 93 Mo. 190, 6 S.W. 96, and State v. Reynolds, 106 Mo. 146, 17 S.W. 322. These cases were written when the statute on cheats and frauds set forth a fo......