State v. Willard
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | Gantt |
| Citation | 119 S.W. 416,219 Mo. 721 |
| Decision Date | 18 May 1909 |
| Parties | STATE v. WILLARD. |
v.
WILLARD.
FORGERY (§ 26)—INDICTMENT.
An indictment under Rev. St. 1899, § 2001 (Ann. St. 1906, p. 1338), for forgery in the second degree, which by section 2024 (Ann. St. 1906, p. 1345) is punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary for from five to ten years, must allege defendant "feloniously" forged the instrument; it not being enough to charge that he made it "with intent * * * feloniously to injure and defraud, against the peace and dignity of the state."
Appeal from Circuit Court, Howell County; W. N. Evans, Judge.
James R. Willard was convicted of forgery in the second degree, and appeals. Reversed and remanded.
E. W. Major, Atty. Gen., and J. M. Atkinson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
GANTT, P. J.
This is an appeal from a judgment and sentence of the circuit court of Howell county. On the 31st of July, 1907, the prosecuting attorney of Howell county filed in the circuit court of said county an amended information in three counts, charging the defendant in the first count with having made and altered a certain check on the 31st day of May, 1907, under the name of F. M. Willard, payable to one Hamon Judd, on the First National Bank of West Plains, Mo.,
for the sum of $20, dated May 29, 1907. The second count charged the defendant with having sold, exchanged, and delivered said forged and altered check to said bank, and the third count charged him with having made, altered, and forged said check, by which pecuniary demand and obligation was purported to be created. The defendant was tried at the December term of the Howell county circuit court, and found guilty under the first count of said information, and his punishment assessed at five years' imprisonment in the state penitentiary. After unsuccessful motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment, he appealed to this court.
The first count of the information is in these words: "J. L. Bess, prosecuting attorney, within and for the county of Howell, in the state of Missouri, for his amended information informs the court that one James R. Willard, on the 31st day of May, A. D. 1907, at the said county of Howell, did then and there willfully and unlawfully forge, counterfeit, and falsely make and alter a certain check purporting to be made by one F. M. Willard, under the name of F. M. Willard on the First National Bank of West Plains, a corporation duly incorporated and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Burton, No. 29557.
...Deffenbacher, 51 Mo. 26; State v. Clayton, 100 Mo. 516; State v. Hang Tong, 115 Mo. 389; State v. Feazell, 132 Mo. 176; State v. Willard, 219 Mo. 721; State v. Muir, 186 S.W. 1047; State v. McGrath, 228 Mo. 422; State v. Siegel, 265 Mo. 239; State v. Baird, 271 Mo. 13; State v. Hodges, 234 ......
-
State v. Willard
...court was reversed, and the cause remanded by this court on the ground of the insufficiency of the information. See State v. Willard, 219 Mo. 721, 119 S. W. 416. The case at bar was tried at the July term of the Howell county circuit court, and at such trial the facts developed were substan......
-
State v. Bennett, No. 23825.
...Mo. 381; State v. Deffenbacher, 51 Mo. 26; State v. Clayton, 100 Mo. loc. cit. 519, 13 S. W. 819, 18 Am. St. Rep. 565; State v. Willard, 219 Mo. 721, 119 S. W. 416; State v. McGrath, 228 Mo. loc. cit. 422, 128 S. W. 966; State v. Siegel, 265 Mo. 239, 177 S. W. 353; State v. Muir (Mo. Sup.) ......
-
Partridge v. Partridge
...and so the circuit court found, that James M. Partridge had no title or interest in any other land in section 33, township 64, range 34, 119 S.W. 416 in Nodaway county, save and except the two-sixths of the 80 acres involved in this suit, to wit, the south half of the southwest quarter of s......
-
State v. Burton, 29557
...Deffenbacher, 51 Mo. 26; State v. Clayton, 100 Mo. 516; State v. Hang Tong, 115 Mo. 389; State v. Feazell, 132 Mo. 176; State v. Willard, 219 Mo. 721; State v. Muir, 186 S.W. 1047; State v. McGrath, 228 Mo. 422; State v. Siegel, 265 Mo. 239; State v. Baird, 271 Mo. 13; State v. Hodges, 234 ......
-
State v. Burton, 29557.
...Deffenbacher, 51 Mo. 26; State v. Clayton, 100 Mo. 516; State v. Hang Tong, 115 Mo. 389; State v. Feazell, 132 Mo. 176; State v. Willard, 219 Mo. 721; State v. Muir, 186 S.W. 1047; State v. McGrath, 228 Mo. 422; State v. Siegel, 265 Mo. 239; State v. Baird, 271 Mo. 13; State v. Hodges, 234 ......
-
State v. Willard
...court was reversed, and the cause remanded by this court on the ground of the insufficiency of the information. See State v. Willard, 219 Mo. 721, 119 S. W. 416. The case at bar was tried at the July term of the Howell county circuit court, and at such trial the facts developed were substan......
-
Partridge v. Partridge
...court found that James M. Partridge had no title [220 Mo. 325] or interest in any other land in section 33, township 64, range 34, [119 S.W. 416] in Nodaway county, save and except the two-sixths of the eighty acres, involved in this suit, to-wit, the south half of the southwest quarter of ......