State v. Reakey

• Decision Date: 31 January 1876
• Parties: THE STATE OF MISSOURI, Appellant, v. HENRY REAKEY, Respondent.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

62 Mo. 40

THE STATE OF MISSOURI, Appellant,

v.HENRY REAKEY, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

January Term, 1876.

Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals.

McKee, McFarland & Alexander, for Respondent.

WAGNER, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant was indicted for the killing of his wife, and was convicted of murder in the first degree. He appealed to the St. Louis Court of Appeals, and in that court the judgment was reversed, and the State has brought the case here.

There are only two questions presented requiring our notice. The first is, whether the State is entitled to an appeal, and the second is, whether the indictment is sufficient.

From the proceedings of the trial court the State is only permitted to take an appeal, where the indictment is quashed, adjudged insufficient upon demurrer, or where the judgment thereon is arrested. (Wagn. Stat., 1114, §§ 13, 14.) But in the present case the State does not appeal from the judgment or rulings of the circuit court where the trial was had. The appeal is from an appellate tribunal, to review questions of law determined in that court, and does not come within either the language or the purview of the statute. There is no statutory provision on the subject, and we must be guided by the constitution regulating appellate proceedings from the court of appeals to this court.

By art. 6, section 12, of the Constitution, the right to appeal or sue out writs of error from the Court of Appeals to this court is given in all cases of felony. There is nothing to indicate that any restriction was intended as to any party. The just and reasonable conclusion is, that as the Court of Appeals is an appellate court, any party may bring its proceedings here for review, whenever a case occurs in which an appeal or writ of error is allowed.

The indictment charges that the defendant “did feloniously, willfully, deliberately, premeditatedly, on purpose and of his malice aforethought, make an assault in and upon the body of his wife, Eliza, with a stick or cudgel of some kind unknown to the jurors, and with his opened right hand, the same being deadly weapons, which the defendant then and there held in his hand or hands, to, at and against the said Eliza, he, the defendant, then and there feloniously, willfully, deliberately, premeditatedly, on purpose, and of his malice aforethought, with said stick or cudgel of some kind unknown to the jurors, did strike, penetrate, bruise and wound the said Eliza in and upon the right side of the forehead, immediately over the right eye, fracturing the skull of the said Eliza with said stick or cudgel, and in and upon the throat with his said opened right hand seized, choked, suffocated and strangled her the said Eliza, thereby giving her, the said Eliza, then and there, with the said stick or cudgel of some kind unknown to the jurors, and with his opened right hand, as aforesaid, by means of...