State v. Schricker

• Decision Date: 31 January 1860
• Citation: 29 Mo. 265
• Parties: THE STATE, Respondent, v. SCHRICKER, Appellant.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

29 Mo. 265

THE STATE, Respondent,

v.SCHRICKER, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

January Term, 1860.

1. The twenty-fifth section of the fourth article of the act regulating practice in criminal cases (R. C. 1855, p. 1176), which prescribes that if a defendant be indicted by a wrong name, and he does not declare his true name before pleading, he shall be proceeded against by the name in the indictment; if he allege that another name is his true name, it must be entered on the minutes of the court, and after such entry the trial and all other proceedings shall be had against him by that name, referring also to that name by which he is indicted, &c.--is constitutional.

Appeal from Moniteau Circuit Court.

The defendant was indicted by the name of William Shucker. He appeared and pleaded that his name was William Schricker, and prayed to be discharged. The court, at the instance of the circuit attorney, entered the name of William Schricker on the minutes of the court and the trial proceeded against him according to the provisions of the twenty-fifth section of article four of the act regulating practice in criminal cases. He was convicted.

Gardenhire, for appellant.

I. The twenty-fifth section of the fourth article of the act concerning criminal practice is unconstitutional. The court erred in putting defendant upon his trial by virtue of its provisions. (See State v. Moore, Walker, 134; Ervine's Appeal, 16 Penn. State, 256; Campbell v. The State, 11 Geo. 353.) It is a violation of the fourteenth clause of the thirteenth article of the constitution of Missouri. If it be constitutional, it subjects every citizen of the state to be put upon his trial for any offence for which an indictment may be pending in his county; in fact for all of them, if the sheriff should serve writs upon all of them. A sheriff's service is substituted for an indictment.

Knott (attorney general), for the State.

I. The section called in question is constitutional. (7 Pet. 247; 8 Verm. 63; Ky. Code, p. 269, § 124, 172, 175, 279, 280; 2 R. C. Indiana, p. 374, § 99, 100; Texas Code, p. 96, 94, § 469; State v. Manning, 14 Texas, 405.)

SCOTT, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant was indicted for selling intoxicating liquors without license by the name of William Shucker. He pleaded the misnomer in abatement. Thereupon the court proceeded as directed in the twenty-fifth section of the fourth article of the act regulating criminal practice, which prescribes that, “if a defendant be indicted by a wrong name unless he declare his true name before pleading, he shall be proceeded against by the name in the indictment. If he allege that another name is his true name, it must be entered on the minutes of the court; and after such entry, the trial and all other proceedings on the indictment shall be had against him by that name, referring also to the name by which he is indicted, in the same manner in all respects, and with the same consequences, as if he had been indicted by his true name.”

It was maintained for the defendant that...