State v. Pike
| Decision Date | 22 December 1925 |
| Docket Number | No. 26518.,26518. |
| Citation | 278 S.W. 725 |
| Parties | STATE v. PIKE. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Ray County; Ralph Hughes, Judge.
Ed Pike was convicted of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Robert W. Otto, Atty. Gen., and George W. Crowder, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
On May 28, 1925, in the circuit court of Ray county, in a trial before a jury the defendant was found guilty of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated. His punishment was assessed at three months in the county jail and fine of $100. From the judgment thereon the defendant appealed to this court.
The record presented here shows that the court granted leave to file a bill of exceptions but no bill of exceptions was ever filed. We have therefore only the record proper for consideration.
I. The information upon which the defendant was found guilty is as follows:
"A. Moody Mansur, prosecuting attorney within and for the county of Ray, in the state of Missouri, and upon his official oath, informs the court that on or about the 11th day of April, A. D. 1925, at the said county of Ray, state of Missouri, one Ed Pike did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously drive and operate a motor vehicle, to wit, an automobile, while the said Ed Pike was then and there under the influence of intoxicating liquor, contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the state of Missouri."
It is based upon paragraph (g) of section 27 of the Acts of the Special Session of the Legislature for 1921 relating to motor vehicles found on page 103, Acts of 1921, as follows:
"Driving in Intoxicated Condition: No person shall operate a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated condition, or when under the influence of drugs."
The information sufficiently charges a violation of that clause. The punishment for the offense is provided in section 29 (c), found on page 105, Acts of Special Session of 1921, which says:
"Any person who violates paragraph * * * (g) of section 27, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and on conviction * * * shall be punished by `confinement' in the penitentiary for a term not exceeding five years, or by confinement in the county jail for a term not exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment."
The motion in arrest of judgment which appears in the record complains that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hollis
...Barker, 490 S.W.2d 263, 270 (Mo.App.1973). To similar effect see State v. Davis, 143 S.W.2d 244, 247[4-5] (Mo.1940); State v. Pike, 312 Mo. 27, 278 S.W. 725, 726 (1925); State v. Hatcher, 303 Mo. 13, 259 S.W. 467, 470 (1924). In Hatcher the information charged that the act was committed on ......
-
State v. Renfro
...L. R. 1094; State v. Gardner, 250 Mo. 426, 157 S. W. 84; State v. Watson, 216 Mo. loc. cit. 424, 115 S. W. 1011. See, also, State v. Pike (Mo. Sup.) 278 S. W. 725 handed down in this division December 22, 1925; and State v. Hatcher, 303 Mo. 13, 259 S. W. II. The appellant has filed no brief......
-
State v. Renfro
...A. L. R. 1094; State v. Gardner, 250 Mo. 426, 157 S.W. 84; State v. Watson, 216 Mo. loc. cit. 424, 115 S.W. 1011. See, also, State v. Pike (Mo. Sup.) 278 S.W. 725 down in this division December 22, 1925; and State v. Hatcher, 303 Mo. 13, 259 S.W. 467. II. The appellant has filed no brief in......
-
Kansas City v. Troutner
...statute is not a road regulation but a prohibition against the operation of a motor vehicle by an intoxicated person. State v. Pike, 312 Mo. 27, 278 S.W. 725, 727(4) (1925). Thus, for conviction under the statute there is no requirement of proof that the motor vehicle was operated on a publ......