State v. Stroud
| Decision Date | 13 August 1925 |
| Docket Number | No. 3818.,3818. |
| Citation | 275 S.W. 58 |
| Parties | STATE v. STROUD. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Butler County; Almon Ing, Judge.
L. R. Stroud was convicted of possessing intoxicating liquor, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Defendant was convicted in the Butler county circuit court on an information charging him with possessing intoxicating liquor, to wit, 15 gallons of whisky, in violation of our prohibition statutes. His punishment was assessed at a fine of $500.
Defendant has assigned no errors and filed no brief in connection with his appeal; the prosecuting attorney, likewise, has failed to lend us any assistance in reviewing this case. Referring, then, to the motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment, we shall consider such points as seem worthy of notice.
Defendant sets up as one reason for new trial that the verdict was against the evidence. The facts brought out at the trial may be briefly stated, as follows: A keg containing a liquid was found by a deputy sheriff of Ripley county in a partially cleared field lying along the public road a short distance east of Doniphan in the afternoon of January 1 or 2, 1924. It lay in a brush pile some 75 feet from the center of the public road, and was partially, If not entirely, covered with leaves and brush. The deputy sheriff and a man who had accompanied him, together with the sheriff, all testified they tasted and smelled a sample of the liquid from the keg, and that it was whisky. They also gave it as their opinion that the liquor was intoxicating.
After discovering the keg the deputy sheriff secreted himself nearby and waited to ascertain to whom the keg belonged. Shortly thereafter, defendant appeared driving an automobile on the public road. No one was with him. He stopped the car opposite the point where the keg was concealed. The deputy sheriff testified defendant Defendant testified, as an excuse, that he believed himself to be a deputy sheriff, with authority to make arrests and seize intoxicating liquors; that he had previously seen the keg from the road, and intended to take it to this car and there knock out the "bung" for the purpose of determining what the keg contained; he also stated that when he saw the keg he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Taylor
...Mo. 304; State v. Parker, 106 Mo. 217; State v. Webster, 152 Mo. 87; State v. Hesterly, 182 Mo. 16; State v. Cain, 247 Mo. 700; State v. Stroud, 275 S.W. 58. (3) The trial court committed no error in admitting the dying declaration of the deceased, Paul Ritter. The witness, Captain John J. ......
-
State v. Taylor
... ... State v. Henson, 290 Mo. 245; State v ... Taylor, 8 S.W.2d 29; State v. Salts, 263 Mo ... 304; State v. Parker, 106 Mo. 217; State v ... Webster, 152 Mo. 87; State v. Hesterly, 182 Mo ... 16; State v. Cain, 247 Mo. 700; State v ... Stroud, 275 S.W. 58. (3) The trial court committed no ... error in admitting the dying declaration of the deceased, ... Paul Ritter. The witness, Captain John J. Carroll, was ... qualified to testify to the dying declaration. Deceased's ... statements were related to the witness in contemplation of ... ...
-
State v. Wright
... ... Williams, 14 ... S.W.2d 434; State v. Hall, 231 S.W. 1004; State ... v. Richards, 67 S.W.2d 58; State v. Pinto, 279 ... S.W. 144; State v. Turner, 259 S.W. 427. (2) The ... court committed no error in denying defendant's ... application for a continuance. State v. Stroud, 275 ... S.W. 58; State v. Wilson, 242 S.W. 886; State v ... Taylor, 8 S.W.2d 29; Sec. 3654, R. S. 1929; State v ... Swafford, 12 S.W.2d 442; State v. Cockriel, 285 ... S.W. 440; Sec. 3630, R. S. 1929; State v. Hancock, 7 ... S.W.2d 275. (3) Juror Perry was qualified to sit as a juror ... ...
-
State v. Ward
...Assistant Attorney General, for respondent. (1) The court did not err in overruling appellant's application for continuance. State v. Stroud, 275 S.W. 58; State v. Henson, 234 S.W. 834; State v. Messino, 30 S.W. (2d) 750; State v. Mosley, 22 S.W. (2d) 784; State v. Wilson, 242 S.W. 886; Sta......