State v. Watson

• Citation: 8 S.W. 383,95 Mo. 411
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
• Decision Date: 21 May 1888
• Parties: STATE v. WATSON.

8 S.W. 383

95 Mo. 411

STATE v. WATSON.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

May 21, 1888.

1. CRIMINAL LAW — SENTENCE — WHEN RENDERED.

Rev. St. Mo. 1879, §§ 1922, 1923, providing that one accused of crime must be brought to trial within a specified time, otherwise he is entitled to be discharged, does not invalidate a sentence pronounced after such time on a verdict rendered within the time.

2. SAME.

The power to sentence one convicted of a crime is not confined to the term of court at which he was convicted.

3. HOMICIDE — MANSLAUGHTER — DESIGN.

On a trial for murder it appeared that defendant was attacked by deceased, who accused him of having lied about him; and that defendant, being knocked over against a window and repeatedly struck, drew a dirk-knife, and stabbed deceased twice, one of the wounds proving fatal. Held, not to be manslaughter in the third decree, under Rev. St. Mo. § 1244, providing that in such case the killing must be "without a design to effect death," as defendant evidently had such design.

Appeal from circuit court, Boone county; C. H. BURKHARTT, Judge.

S. C. Douglass and Smith, Silver & Brown, for appellant. The Attorney General, for respondent.

BLACK, J.

The defendant was indicted for murder in the second degree. The trial took place at the November term, 1882, of the Boone county circuit court, and resulted in a verdict of manslaughter in the third degree. Motions for new trial and in arrest were filed and overruled at that term, and the defendant appealed to this court. The cause was stricken from the docket, on motion of the attorney general, because the record disclosed no final judgment. Thereafter, and at the June term, 1885, of the circuit court, the defendant, then out on bail, was brought before the court, and sentenced in accordance with the previous verdict, and he prosecutes this appeal, bringing up the whole record. The evidence shows that Watson, the defendant, and Mardicai, the deceased, were attendants at a dance at the house of Mr. Barkwell. During the evening, deceased accused defendant of having lied about him on some former occasion. Defendant denied the charge. Further words and a scuffle took place between them in the house, and in the presence of the company, and in all of which the deceased was the constant aggressor. Deceased said: "We will go out and settle this," at the same time pulling the defendant, who declined to go out of the house. The scuffle continued; the defendant threatening to cut deceased loose if he did not let go. The deceased replied that he would be d ____ d if he would let go. Deceased then struck the accused with his right fist, holding defendant with his left hand. The blow knocked defendant over against the window, and deceased continued striking the defendant, whereupon the defendant drew from his coat pocket a dirk-knife four and a half inches in length of blade, and with it stabbed deceased twice in the left side, when both parties left the room. One of the wounds was four or five inches in depth, ranging upwards to the lower part of the lung, and proved fatal.

1. As will be seen, the sentence in this case was pronounced by the court more than two years after verdict, and after the motions for new trial and in arrest had been overruled; and because of this delay the defendant insists that the sentence is void, and that he should be discharged, notwithstanding his appeal prosecuted during that time. Sections 1922, 1923, Rev. St. 1879, relied upon by appellant, have no direct application to the question thus presented. They provide that the accused must be brought to trial within a specified time after indictment found, — before the end of the second term of the court when confined, and before the end of the third term when on bail. If not thus brought to trial, he is entitled to be discharged, unless the...