State v. Thompson
| Decision Date | 31 July 1860 |
| Citation | 30 Mo. 470 |
| Parties | THE STATE, Appellant, v. THOMPSON, Respondent. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
1. An indictment charging that the defendant on, &c., at &c., “did then and there feloniously assault one J. D. with a certain handle of a hoe, a deadly weapon, by feloniously assaulting and striking him, the said D., with the said hoe handle, with intent, in so doing, him the said D. then and there feloniously to maim, wound and disfigure, contrary,” &c., is a good indictment under the thirty-eighth section of the second article of the act concerning crimes and punishments. A felonious maiming is a felony.
Appeal from Greene Circuit Court.
This was an action against William Thompson. The indictment charges “that William Thompson, late of, &c., on, &c., with force and arms, in the county aforesaid, did then and there feloniously assault one James Davis with a certain handle of a hoe, a deadly weapon, by feloniously assaulting and striking him, the said Davis, with the said hoe handle, with intent, in so doing, him the said Davis then and there feloniously to maim, wound and disfigure, contrary,” &c.
This indictment was quashed on motion of the defendant.Knott, (attorney general,) for the State.
I. Had defendant succeeded in wounding, maiming or disfiguring Davis, he would have been indicted for felony under the thirty-ninth section of the second article of the act concerning crimes and punishments; (R. C. 1855, p. 567;) and the only question now to be determined is, whether this is a good indictment under the first section of the ninth article of the same act for an attempt to commit the offence provided for in the section first above cited; or for an assault with intent to commit a felony, under the thirty-eighth section of the second article.
Price & Foster, for respondent.
I. The offence charged is not indictable by the law of the land. The offence charged is but a common assault, over which justices of the peace alone had jurisdiction. (R. C. 1855, p. 977, § 1.) The indictment charged the assault was committed with intent to maim, wound, disfigure, &c. This is not made an offence by the statute respecting crimes. (R. C. 1855, p. 567, § 38.) It does not come within either of sections thirty-four or thirty-five, because those sections require all the maiming, wounding, assaults and batteries therein mentioned to be done on purpose and of malice aforethought. (5 Mo. 357.) This indictment does not so charge the assault. The assault, therefore, with intent...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The State v. Webb
...... State, 7 Mo. 183 (a stick of timber); Jennings v. State, 9 Mo. 862 (a large iron auger); State v. Freeman, 21 Mo. 481 (an iron shovel); State v. Bohannon, 21 Mo. 490 (a rock, and that maiming occurred. in that a thumb was bitten off); State v. Thompson, . 30 Mo. 470 (a hoe handle); State v. Moore, 65 Mo. 606 (a knife); State v. Agee, 68 Mo. 264 (a pistol);. Carrico v. State, 11 Mo. 579 (a large piece of. wood); State v. Bailey, 21 Mo. 484 (a large block of. wood); State v. Davis, 29 Mo. 391 (a knife);. State v. Janke, 238 Mo. ......
-
State v. Webb
...21 Mo. 481 (an iron shovel); State v. Bohannon, 21 Mo. 490 (a rock, and that maiming occurred in that a thumb was bitten off); State v. Thompson, 30 Mo. 470 (a hoe handle); State v. Moore, 65 Mo. 606 (a knife); State v. Agee, 68 Mo. 264 (a pistol); Carrico v. State, 11 Mo. 579 (a large piec......
-
The State v. Foster
...... construed in their plain ordinary sense; as usually defined,. they mean the infliction of some serious bodily injury. The. offense as charged, therefore, under a proper construction of. the statute, may be designated as a felonious assault. [State v. Brown, 60 Mo. 141; State v. Thompson, 30 Mo. 470.] Thus classified, there is no. occasion as required by the rule quoted, for coupling the. commission of the act with a specific intent to maim in order. to constitute. [220 S.W. 961] . the offense charged. Hence proof of the commission of the. felonious assault will authorize ......
-
State v. Foster
...therefore, under a proper construction of the statute, may be designated as a felonious assault. State v. Brown, 60 Mo. 141; State v. Thompson, 30 Mo. 470. Thus classified, there is no occasion, as required by the rule quoted, for coupling the commission of the act with a specific intent to......