State v. Wray

Decided November 5, 1894

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1894-11-05

Louis Criminal Court.—Hon. Henry L. Edmunds, Judge. (1) The indictment is in proper form, and there is no error apparent upon the record proper.

Relies on State v. Griffin

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1894-11-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 1981

2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Sherwood, J.

¶1Indicted for grand larceny, the defendant was convicted of that ofíense and appeals to this court.

¶2The indictment is sufficient. The evidence has been preserved in the bill of exceptions, but inasmuch as the motion for a new trial has not been preserved in the bill, nor preserved in the record and called for in the bill, the clerk being directed to copy the same, we can not look into any exceptions taken nor into the evidence adduced. R. S. 1889, sec. 2304; State v. Griffin, 98 Mo. 672.

¶3As there is no error in the record proper, the judgment must be affirmed.

All concur.