Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

104 Mo. App. 34

State v. Hottle

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided January 19, 1904

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1904-01-19

— How. E. R. McKee, Judge. (1) The venne was not proven, neither by direct proof nor by proof of facts and circumstances from which it could be made to appear that the offense charged was committed in Clark county, Missouri; hence the evidence does not show jurisdiction and will not support verdict of guilty.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1910

2 state decisions

Relies on State v. King

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and remanded · Decided 1904-01-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

BLAND, P. J.

¶1The defendant, a proprietor of a drugstore, was convicted of a violation of section 3051, R. S. 1899, for permitting the drinking of intoxicating liquors in his place of business. From this conviction he appealed.

¶2It is contended by appellant that there was no proof of the venue. The evidence showed that Dr. J. W. Peck-stein was a registered pharmacist in Clark county; that he resided in Wyaconda and had his office in the same building in which the defendant kept a drugstore and that he was the owner of the building. Witness Speer testified that he lived in Wyaconda and that he had *37drunk beer in the back room of defendant’s drugstore. On this evidence it reasonably appears thht defendant’s drugstore was kept in Wyaconda; but it nowhere appears that Wyaconda, if a town or village, is in Clark county or in this State. Such evidence is insufficient to establish the venue. State v. King, 111 Mo. 576, and cases cited.

¶3The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reyburn and Goode, JJ., concur.
/104/moapp/34 · .json · Public domain