Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

15 Mo. 208

State v. Wall

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 15, 1851

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1851-10-15

xh© indictment substantially sets forth the offence as described in the act creating it. It charges the defendant at &c., on &c., as a lawyer, being employed, did practice the law in part, for a livelihood, without license, &c. It is submitted, that this indictment sets forth to a reasonable intendment the facts constituting the offence, therefore the court erred in quashing it.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1851-10-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently May 1905

22 state decisions

80185118601870188018901900decided

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 →

Ryland, J.j

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2The defendant, Richard Wall, was indicted by the grand jury of Stoddard county at the September term of the circuit court, 1850, for practicing law for a livelihood, without first having obtained a license therefor, under the statute passed in February, 1847, entitled an “act t.o sustain the credit of the State.”

¶3The defendants appeared a¿id moved the court to quash the indictment; which motion was sustained, and the circuit attorney excepted to the opinion of the court, but filed no bill of exceptions, and afterwards brings the case to this court by appeal.

¶4That indictments may be sometimes quashed for causes not appearing on their face, see 2 Gallison’s Reports; 364; 1 Chitty’s Criminal Law, p. 319, (in note;) State vs. Cain & Price, 1 Hawk’s Reports, 352. It is proper that the action of the court and the grounds thereof be made part of the record by bill of exceptions.

¶5It does not follow that every motion made in a cause becomes part of the record, because the clerk in copying the proceedings should insert such motions: See United States vs. Gamble & Bates, 10 Mo. R., 457.

¶6There being no bill of exceptions in this case, we will not disturb the judgment of the court below. My brother judges concurring herein, the judgment is affirmed.

/15/mo/208 · .json · Public domain