Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

62 Mo. 596

State v. Stonum

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided May 15, 1876

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1876-05-15

<p>1. Practice, criminal — Ti'ials—Instructions to be given, — Jn all criminal cases it is the duty of the court to instruct the jury as to the law ; if the instructions offered are objectionable, the court should proceed to give such as the law requires.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1876-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 1961

8 state decisions

301876188018901900191019201930194019501960decided

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 convicted of petit larceny, and the only point now relied upon in this court is, that no instructions were given by the court. In the State vs. Mathews (20 Mo., 55) it was expressly adjudged, that it is the duty of the court in all criminal cases to instruct the jury, as to the law; that if the instructions offered are objectionable, the court should proceed to give such as the law requires. Aside from this being binding authority, we think it is sustained by good reason. Juries should not be allowed to guess at the law in such cases. The court should instruct them as to their duties and as to the law in the case. Reversed and remanded. All the judges concur, except Judge'Vories, who is absent.

/62/mo/596 · .json · Public domain