State v. Scott

• Decision Date: 04 March 1908
• Citation: 214 Mo. 257,113 S.W. 1069
• Parties: STATE v. SCOTT.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

113 S.W. 1069

214 Mo. 257

STATE v. SCOTT.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

March 4, 1908.

1. CRIMINAL LAW (§ 954) — MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL — GROUNDS.

A motion for a new trial after conviction must so definitely specify the reasons therefor as to direct attention to the precise error of which complaint was made, and no reason not so specified can be urged in support of the motion.

2. CRIMINAL LAW (§ 954) — MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL — GROUNDS.

The assertion in a motion for a new trial that the conviction is against the law is insufficient for failure to indicate specifically wherein it infringes on the law.

3. CRIMINAL LAW (§ 1159) — APPEAL — SETTING ASIDE VERDICT.

That a conviction may be against the evidence will not justify its vacation on appeal, as the appellate court will not interfere unless there is no substantial evidence of defendant's guilt in the case.

4. ELECTIONS (§ 329) — FRAUDULENT VOTING — EVIDENCE.

Evidence held to justify a conviction of attempted fraudulent voting in the name of another.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Hugo Muench, Judge.

James, alias Jim Scott, was convicted of attempted fraudulent voting, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Thos. J. J. Stanton, for appellant. Herbert S. Hadley, Atty. Gen., and F. G. Ferris, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

BURGESS, J.

At the June term, 1907, of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, under an information filed by the assistant circuit attorney, the defendant was found guilty of attempted fraudulent voting in a name not his own, and his punishment assessed at imprisonment in the penitentiary for three years. After filing ineffectual motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment, he appealed.

The information charged as follows: "That on the second day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and seven, at the city of St. Louis, aforesaid, and in each ward and election precinct of said city of St. Louis, a general election was had and held pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the state of Missouri, for the choice and election of certain city officers, to wit, for the election of members of the city council of the city of St. Louis, members of the board of education of the city of St. Louis, and for one member of the house of delegates of the said city of St. Louis, to be elected from each ward thereof; and that one John Scott was then and there a duly registered voter and elector in the Sixth election precinct of the Fourteenth ward of said city of St. Louis, entitled to cast a ballot for the officers to be voted upon at said election as aforesaid, and that then and there on said second day of April, one thousand nine hundred and seven, at the city of St. Louis aforesaid, at the said general election, one James, alias Jim, Scott, did appear at the polling place of the said Sixth election precinct of the Fourteenth ward of said city of St. Louis, before the duly appointed, qualified and acting judges and clerks of election within and for the said election precinct of said ward, and knowing himself not to be the John Scott, a duly registered voter and elector in said election precinct as aforesaid, did then and there falsely, fraudulently and feloniously apply for a ballot in and upon the name of the said John Scott, registered voter and elector as aforesaid, and did then and there falsely, fraudulently and feloniously offer and attempt to cast said ballot and attempt to vote at the said general election and for the officers aforesaid, in and upon the name of the said John Scott, registered voter and elector as aforesaid; against the peace and dignity of the state."

The evidence for the state tended to prove that on the 2d day of April, 1907, in the city of St. Louis, and in each ward and election precinct of said city, a general election was held, pursuant to law, for the choice and election of certain...