Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

62 Mo. 595

State v. Berry

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided May 15, 1876

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1876-05-15

The three causes attempted to be set up by the defendant, as a cause-for quashing the indictment, are not sufficient, for the reason that they do not distinctly specify the grounds of objection to the indictment. The specific defect must be pointed out. (Wagn. Stat., 1090, §24; State vs. Van Houten, 37 Mo., 357 ; State vs. Marshall, 47 Mo., 378.)

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1876-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently March 1904

3 state decisions

101876188018901900decided

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 →

Wagner, Judge,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2The defendant was indicted for exercising the trade or business of a public auctioneer without license.

¶3A motion to quash was sustained to the indictment, and the causes set forth in the motion merely stated in general' language, that no crime against the laws of the State was charged, and that the indictment did not state facts which authorized the court to put the defendant upon trial. The statute provides that a'demurrer to, or a motion to quash, an indictment, shall distinctly specify the grounds of objection to the indictment, unless it does so it shall be disregarded, nor should any reason be held to sustain such demurrer or motion not specified therein. (Wagn. Stat., 1090, § 24.) The causes assigned for quashing were too general and pointed out no specific objection. They should therefore have been disregarded.

¶4The judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded. The other judges concur, except Judge Tories, who is absent.

/62/mo/595 · .json · Public domain