State v. Orrick

• Decision Date: 25 September 1891
• Citation: 17 S.W. 329,106 Mo. 111
• Parties: STATE v. ORRICK.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

17 S.W. 329

106 Mo. 111

STATE v. ORRICK.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

September 25, 1891.

SUPREME COURT — JURISDICTION IN BANC.

A motion to transfer a cause to the supreme court in banc after decision rendered on the ground that one of the judges did not sit at the hearing, nor participate in the decision, must be denied, since the constitution of Missouri authorizes such transfer only "when the judge of the division dissents from the opinion therein, or when a federal question is involved."

On motion to transfer to court in banc.

For former report, see 17 S. W. Rep. 176.

J. B. Walker and W. S. Anthony, for appellant. John M. Wood, Atty. Gen., for the State.

MACFARLANE, J.

A motion to transfer this cause to the court in banc was made after the decision, under the mistaken belief that one of the judges did not sit at the hearing or participate in the decision. In the case of State v. Armstrong, 16 S. W. Rep. 604, one of the judges did not sit, and a motion was made to transfer the cause to the court in banc for that reason. The court in that case held, though no opinion was written, that the right of the losing party to have a transfer of the case was limited to the causes specified in section 4 of the amendment to the constitution: "Where a judge of the division dissents from the opinion therein, or when a federal question is involved." No cause would have been shown in this case for a transfer to banc, though one of the judges had taken no part in the decision.

All concur.