Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

67 Mo. 36

State v. Reed

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 15, 1877

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1877-10-15

— Hon. W. E. G-eiqer, Judge. 1. The defendant is entitled to have, and the State is. hound to furnish a transcript correct in all material particulars. Where the record is defective only in immaterial Tespects, a writ of certiorari cannot be awarded. By .awarding the writ in this case, this court has given, judgment that the defects are material.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1877-10-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently May 1950

6 state decisions

20187718801890190019101920193019401950decided

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 →

Napton, J.

¶1The defendant was indicted in Greene county on the 14th of May, 1870,,for the murder of A. Hollingsworth, and a change of venue was awarded to the county of Christian, and at the March term, 1871, of the Christian circuit court a trial was had and the defendant convicted of manslaughter in the third degree, and sentenced to two years imprisonment in the penitentiary. The defendant appealed to this court, and a supersedeas was granted. The transcript of the proceedings in the case having been filed in 1871, and the case docketed in 1874, the appellant suggested a diminution of the record, stating various defects, omissions and ineox’rect statemeixts in the recox’d, suppoi’ted hy the affidavit of his attorney, and upon his motioxx a certiorari was awarded. To this a return was made, stating that the clex’k’s office had been broken open, on a night stated, axxd nearly all the papers in this case stolen. The record sent up in obedience to the last certiorari is in fact greatly more defective than the first record, which was so defective as iix our opinioxx to authoxize the writ. The defendant’s attorney filed a motion to reverse the judgment, inasmuch as no record can be procured, and the defendant is entitled to have his case reviewed by this coui’t. This motion was taken under advisexneixt, a-xxd we are xxow of opinion that it should be sustained. The judgment is therefore reversed and the case remanded.

The other judges eonexu’.

¶2Reversed,

/67/mo/36 · .json · Public domain