State v. Wilson

Decision Date29 November 1910
Citation132 S.W. 238,230 Mo. 647
PartiesSTATE v. WILSON.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from Criminal Court, Buchanan County; Thos. F. Ryan, Judge.

David Wilson was convicted of assault, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Mytton & Parkinson, for appellant. E. W. Major, Atty. Gen., and Jno. M. Dawson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

KENNISH, J.

The prosecuting attorney of Buchanan county on the 30th day of January, 1909, filed an information with the clerk of the criminal court of that county charging the defendant, David Wilson, with a felonious assault with intent to kill upon Frederick Bolsom. Upon a trial the defendant was convicted of a common assault, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $100 and imprisonment in the county jail for the term of six months. Motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment were filed, overruled, and judgment pronounced upon the verdict. The defendant then prayed an appeal, which was granted by the court to the Kansas City Court of Appeals. The Kansas City Court of Appeals at the March term, 1910 (126 S. W. 996) ordered the cause certified to this court for the reason that the offense charged was a felony and therefore within the appellate jurisdiction of this court, and the cause is now before us for decision.

In appellant's brief but two alleged errors of the trial court are relied upon for a reversal of the judgment, and we shall set out in this opinion only such parts of the record as are necessary in passing upon the errors thus assigned.

First. Appellant complains of error in instruction No. 7, given by the court of its own motion. This instruction is as follows: "In determining as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant, you should take into account the testimony in relation to his character as shown by the evidence, and you should give such testimony such weight as you may deem proper; but if, from all the evidence before you, you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt, as defined in these instructions, that the defendant is guilty, then his previous good character, if shown, cannot justify, excuse, palliate, or mitigate the offense, and you cannot acquit him merely because you may believe he has been a person of good repute." This instruction is in form as approved in a number of cases by this court, and no good reason has been advanced why we should now enter upon a reconsideration of the question as to whether it is a correct statement of the law upon the subject of good character. State v. Darrah 152 Mo. 522, 54 S. W. 226; State v. Cushenberry, 157 Mo. 168, 56 S. W. 737; State v. Wertz, 191 Mo. 569, 90 S. W. 838.

Second. In the seventh ground of the motion for a new trial it is alleged that one of the jurors named Freeman had been convicted of a felony, and had not received a pardon restoring his citizenship, and therefore that he was not qualified to sit as a juror in the case; that by answering in the negative on his voir dire if he knew of any reason why he could not sit as a juryman in the case and give defendant a fair and impartial trial, the defendant was thereby deceived and misled as to his qualifications. No affidavit of either the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 cases
  • State v. Davis
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 11 July 1935
    ...282 Mo. 51. (4) The jury was properly qualified to pass on the guilt or innocence of this defendant. Sec. 8747, R.S. 1929; State v. Wilson, 230 Mo. 651, 132 S.W. 238; State v. Barr, 20 S.W. (2d) 600. (5) There is no proof that the verdict as rendered be a quotient punishment and not the res......
  • State v. Davis
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 11 July 1935
    ...282 Mo. 51. (4) The jury was properly qualified to pass on the guilt or innocence of this defendant. Sec. 8747, R. S. 1929; State v. Wilson, 230 Mo. 651, 132 S.W. 238; State v. Barr, 20 S.W.2d 600. (5) There is no that the verdict as rendered be a quotient punishment and not the result of d......
  • Lee v. Baltimore Hotel Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 13 December 1939
    ... ... 153, 119 S.W. 990; Mo. Const., Art. II, Sec. 28; ... Toledo Consolidated St. Ry. Co. v. Toledo Elec. Street ... Ry. Co., 12 Ohio C. C. 367; State v. Breen, 59 ... Mo. 413; State v. Rouner, 333 Mo. 1336, 64 S.W.2d ... 916; 92 A. L. R. 1099; State v. Riley, 4 Mo.App ... 392. (2) No exceptions ... 8747, 8751, ... R. S. 1929; State v. Watson, 104 S.W.2d 272; ... Allen v. C., R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 327 Mo. 526, 37 ... S.W.2d 607; State v. Wilson, 230 Mo. 647, 132 S.W ... 238; Massman v. K. C. Pub. Serv. Co., 119 S.W.2d ... 833; State v. Taylor, 40 S.W.2d 1079. (3) Failure to ... comply ... ...
  • The State v. Murray
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 20 December 1926
    ... ... allowed after the jury is sworn." Under that section we ... have held that if a party fails to question a juror as to his ... qualifications, when the juror is examined upon his voir ... dire, it is too late to raise objection afterward ... [State v. Wilson, 230 Mo. 647; Hart Realty Co ... v. Ryan, 288 Mo. l. c. 196.] ...          Further, ... the only question asked of Nelson on his voir dire ... examination in this case was whether he knew of any reason ... why he could not serve as a juror. He answered ...          When he ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT