State v. Renard
| Decision Date | 05 June 1925 |
| Docket Number | NO. 25643.,25643. |
| Citation | 273 S.W. 1057 |
| Parties | STATE v. RENARD. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; John W. Calhoun, Judge.
Ray Renard was convicted of carrying a revolver concealed about his person, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Jesse W. Barrett, Atty. Gen. (Ellison A. Poulton, of Canton, of counsel), for the State.
The defendant was convicted of carrying a revolver concealed about his person, and his punishment assessed at imprisonment for nine months in the city jail in accordance with the verdict of the jury.
The defendant was arrested on February 20, 1923, as he was driving his car on the street in the city of St. Louis, and as he got out of the car the officer found a loaded revolver concealed in the pocket of defendant's coat.
The information is based on section 3275, R. S. 1919. It charges the offense in the language of the statute and sufficiently charges the defendant with the felony of carrying a dangerous' and deadly weapon concealed about his person. State v. Jackson, 283 Mo. 18, 222 S. W. 746, and State v. Whitman (Mo. Sun.) 248 S. W. 937.
The chief error assigned in the motion for new trial is that the court erred in not permitting the defendant to prove on the cross-examination of the officer that at the time the officer took the revolver from the pocket of the defendant's coat the defendant told the officer he was leaving the city and going into the state of Illinois. This was a self-serving statement, and was properly excluded. State v. Musick, 101 Mo. 260, 274, 14 S. W. 212; State v. Moore, 156 Mo. 204, 211, 56 S. W. 883; State v. Powell (Mo. Sup.) 217 S. W. 38 (10). It was not a part of the res gest. State v. Reeves (Mo. Sup.) 195 S. W. 1027, 1030, and State v. Powell, supra.
Another error assigned is that the court erred in refusing to instruct the jury to acquit because of a material variance between the allegations of the information and the evidence; in this, the information charges that the defendant carried a dangerous and deadly weapon concealed about his person, while the proof showed he carried it upon his person. A variance shall not be deemed ground for an acquittal of the defendant, unless the court, before which the trial shall be had, shall find that such variance is material to the merits of the case and prejudicial to the defense of the defendant. Section 3907, R. S. 1919. There was no variance. The gravamen of the offense is the carrying of the weapon concealed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hefflin
...Mo. 14, 132 S.W. 245; State v. Reeves, 195 S.W. 1027; State v. Burns, 278 Mo. 441, 213 S.W. 114; State v. Jones, 256 S.W. 787; State v. Renard, 273 S.W. 1057. (6) Where a defendant is on trial for one crime, evidence of an unrelated crime is not admissible to prove his crime in the particul......
-
State v. Stallings
... ... State v ... Birks, 199 Mo. 275; State v. Hale, 238 Mo. 502; ... State v. Ethridge, 188 Mo. 358; State v ... Moore, 36 S.W.2d 928; State v. Standifer, 289 ... S.W. 856. (4) Self-serving statements properly excluded ... State v. Reeves, 195 S.W. 1030; State v ... Renard, 273 S.W. 1057; State v. Musick, 101 Mo ... 274. (5) Facts not proved but mentioned in prosecuting ... attorney's opening statement not prejudicial error ... State v. Rowe, 24 S.W.2d 1037. (6) The plea in bar ... was properly overruled. State v. Billings, 140 Mo ... 204; State v. Stallings, ... ...
-
State v. Harris
... ... Hayes, Assistant ... Attorney-General, for respondent ... (1) The ... court did not err in excluding from the jury exhibits A, B, C ... and D offered by the defendant. Littig v. Urbauer-Atwood ... Heating Co., 237 S.W. 785; State v. Renard, 273 ... S.W. 1057; State v. Tarwater, 239 S.W. 480; 22 C ... J., sec. 1091, p. 895. (2) The court did not err in ... permitting Mrs. Grace King to testify in rebuttal without ... having her name endorsed upon the information. State v ... Jennings, 34 S.W.2d 50; State v. Cain, 37 ... S.W.2d ... ...
-
State v. Stallings
...S.W. (2d) 928; State v. Standifer, 289 S.W. 856. (4) Self-serving statements properly excluded. State v. Reeves, 195 S.W. 1030; State v. Renard, 273 S.W. 1057; State v. Musick, 101 Mo. 274. (5) Facts not proved but mentioned in prosecuting attorney's opening statement not prejudicial error.......