State v. Vonderau, No. 53360
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
| Writing for the Court | DONNELLY; Per Curiam; The foregoing opinion by Donnelly |
| Citation | 438 S.W.2d 271 |
| Decision Date | 10 March 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 53360 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Otto Louis VONDERAU, Appellant. |
Page 271
v.
Otto Louis VONDERAU, Appellant.
Norman H. Anderson, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Frank P. Motherway, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Louis, for respondent.
Henry G. Morris, St. Louis, for appellant.
DONNELLY, Judge.
Defendant, Otto Louis Vonderau, was convicted on May 24, 1967, of willfully striking a police officer under § 557.215, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S. (Laws 1965, p. 668, § 1) by a jury in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, and his punishment was assessed at imprisonment in the Workhouse of the City of St. Louis for a period of six months. Following rendition of judgment and imposition of sentence an appeal was perfected to this Court. We reverse and remand for new trial.
The essential portion of the indictment charges:
'That OTTO LOUIS VONDERAU on the 19th day of May, one thousand nine hundred
Page 272
and sixty-six, at the City of St. Louis aforesaid, willfully did strike and hit with an automobile PATROLMAN DONALD EICKHOFF, a member of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department; said PATROLMAN DONALD EICKHOFF, then and there and at the time of the assault aforesaid being actively engaged in the performance of duties imposed upon him by law; contrary to the form of the Statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State.'Section 557.215, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S. (Laws 1965, p. 668, § 1), reads as follows: 'Any person who shall willfully strike, beat or wound any police officer, sheriff, highway patrol officer or other peace officer while such officer is actively engaged in the performance of duties imposed on him by law, and every person who shall aid or assist in doing any such striking, beating or wounding, is guilty of a crime and, upon conviction, shall be punished by imprisonment by the department of corrections for a term of not more than five years, or by confinement in the county jail for not less than six months nor more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment.'
Appellant contends the indictment is fatally defective because it fails to allege appellant willfully and feloniously did strike and hit with an automobile Patrolman Donald Eickhoff. We agree.
In State v. Murdock, 9 Mo. 739, 740 (1846), this Court said: '* * * The word feloniously is indispensably necessary in all indictments for felony; whether statutory or by common law.' See also State v. Gilbert, 24 Mo. 380, 381 (1857); and State v. Deffenbacher, 51 Mo. 26, 27 (1872).
In State v. Siegel, 265 Mo. 239, 245--246, 177 S.W. 353, 354 (1915), this Court stated the general rule as follows: '* * * Whatever may be the rule elsewhere, whether founded upon an express statute or such a construction of the statute of jeofails as to render the use of the word not necessary, there is no exception to the necessity of its use in Missouri in any indictment or information where the offense charged is a felony; and, while the word 'felony' seems, as defined by section 4923, R.S. 1909 (§ 556.020 RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S.), to be restricted to capital cases and those punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary, under numerous rulings of this court it is held to mean any offense for which the accused may, upon conviction, be imprisoned in the penitentiary, although the minimum punishment for same may be a jail sentence or a fine. * * *
'In charging a felony, therefore, whether made so by a direct statute or by classification on account of the punishment prescribed, the use of the word 'feloniously' is necessary, for the very sufficient reason that its use informs the accused of the nature or grade of crime he is alleged to have committed. The offense here charged is not alleged to have been committed feloniously, and hence the information is insufficient.'
In cases involving violations of the intoxicating liquor statutes, this Court has not followed the general rule, and has held that an indictment in the language of the statute was sufficient. Cf. State v. Burton, 324 Mo. 214, 22 S.W.2d 1049...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Taylor, No. 34952
...does not necessarily mean a police officer. We find this contention without merit. The case relied on by appellant, State v. Vonderau, 438 S.W.2d 271 (Mo. banc 1969), held only that an indictment for striking a police officer under Section 557.215 RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S., is defective if it omi......
-
State v. Booker, No. 35979
...the person committing the acts alleged in the information. See also State v. Johnson, 504 S.W.2d 23, 27(3) (Mo.1973); State v. Vonderau, 438 S.W.2d 271, 274(3) (Mo.banc 1969). Defendant's first point is Defendant next contends it was error to admit C_ _ S_ _'s testimony concerning events gi......
-
State v. Barkwell, No. 10913
...contained in the second paragraph of that count. Page 97 The authority upon which defendant principally relies is State v. Vonderau, 438 S.W.2d 271 (Mo. banc 1969). In that case the supreme court held an indictment to be fatally defective where it charged defendant with willfully striking a......
-
State v. Davis, No. KCD
...or information charging a felony must contain an allegation that the act charged was 'feloniously' committed. State v. Vonderau, 438 S.W.2d 271 (Mo.banc 1969). In this case the Supreme Court held that the use of such term in an indictment adequately informed the accused of the nature of the......
-
State v. Taylor, No. 34952
...does not necessarily mean a police officer. We find this contention without merit. The case relied on by appellant, State v. Vonderau, 438 S.W.2d 271 (Mo. banc 1969), held only that an indictment for striking a police officer under Section 557.215 RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S., is defective if it omi......
-
State v. Booker, No. 35979
...the person committing the acts alleged in the information. See also State v. Johnson, 504 S.W.2d 23, 27(3) (Mo.1973); State v. Vonderau, 438 S.W.2d 271, 274(3) (Mo.banc 1969). Defendant's first point is Defendant next contends it was error to admit C_ _ S_ _'s testimony concerning events gi......
-
State v. Barkwell, No. 10913
....") contained in the second paragraph of that count. Page 97 The authority upon which defendant principally relies is State v. Vonderau, 438 S.W.2d 271 (Mo. banc 1969). In that case the supreme court held an indictment to be fatally defective where it charged defendant with willfully striki......
-
State v. Davis, No. KCD
...or information charging a felony must contain an allegation that the act charged was 'feloniously' committed. State v. Vonderau, 438 S.W.2d 271 (Mo.banc 1969). In this case the Supreme Court held that the use of such term in an indictment adequately informed the accused of the nature of the......