State v. Maher
Decision Date | 06 February 1939 |
Docket Number | No. 5994.,5994. |
Citation | 124 S.W.2d 679 |
Parties | STATE OF MISSOURI, APPELLANT v. ARTHUR MAHER, RESPONDENT. |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Jasper County.— Hon. Wilbur J. Owen, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Roy McKittrick,Attorney-General, Wm. Orr Sawyers and Arthur O'Keefe, Assistant Attorneys-General, for appellant.
Emerson Foulke and A.E. Spencer, Sr., for respondent.
On March 30, 1937, a grand jury presented in open court of Jasper County, division No. 1, an indictment charging the defendant with official misconduct and negligence in office.On motion of defendant a change of venue was granted to division No. 2 of said circuit court.From a judgment sustaining a motion to quash the indictmentthe State appealed to the Supreme Court where, upon motion of defendant, the cause was transferred to this court.
The indictment, omitting the formal parts, is as follows:
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
State v. Tandy, 51477
...this contention, the defendant cites the cases of Dameron v. State, 8 Mo. 494, State v. Jackson, Mo., 369 S.W.2d 199, State v. Maher, 232 Mo.App. 998, 124 S.W.2d 679, and State v. Daegele, Mo., 302 S.W.2d 20. These decisions have been considered, but they are not controlling or persuasive o......
-
State v. Hasler
...as to notify the defendant of the acts which he is alleged to have committed. State v. Kesterson, supra, (1); State v. Maher, 232 Mo.App. 998, 124 S.W.2d 679. The requirement of specificity in the indictment is bottomed upon several considerations. Perhaps most important, the defendant is e......
- State v. Maher
-
State v. Reynolds
...is the contention of the State that the information charges an offense in substantially the words of the statute. In State v. Maher, 232 Mo.App. 998, 124 S.W.2d 679, 682, this court stated the law as '* * * The indictment should state facts which constitute the offense with reasonable certa......