Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

77 Mo. 338

State v. Findley

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided April 15, 1883

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1883-04-15

<p>An Indictment for Selling Liquor, unlawfully, charged the selling to have been done “ on or about the months of January, February and March.” Held, that it was not open to the objection that it charged several offenses in one count, time not being of the essence of the offense.</p>

Relies on Storrs v. State · State v. Fitzsimmons · State v. Fletcher

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed · Decided 1883-04-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 1909

1 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

30188318901900decided

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 →

Norton, J.

¶1At the April term, 1879, of the Howell county circuit court defendant was indicted for seliingintoxicatingliquors as a druggist in less quantities than one gallon. *339The indictment charges the selling to have been done “on or about the months of January, February and March, 1879.” To this indictment a demurrer was interposed by defendant, which was sustained, and from this action of the court the State has appealed. The only objection presented by the demurrer is, that the indictment charged several offenses in one count, in this, that it charged the selling to have been done on or about the months of January, February and March.

¶2Under the rulings of this court in the cases of Storrs v. State, 3 Mo. 9; State v. Fletcher, 18 Mo. 425; State v. Myers, 20 Mo. 411; State v. Fitzsimmons, 30 Mo. 236, the point raised by the demurrer is not well taken, and the action of the court in sustaining it was erroneous. As time is not the essence of the offense, it is stated with sufficient certainty. Had the indictment charged the offense to have been committed on the first day of January, the State, on the trial, would have been permitted to show that it was committed on any other day than that alleged in the indictment, provided it was within twelve months before the indictment was found. R. S., § 1821; State v. Magrath, 19 Mo. 678; State v. Stumbo, 26 Mo. 306; State v. Wilcoxen, 38 Mo. 370. Judgment reversed and cause remanded,

in which all concur.
/77/mo/338 · .json · Public domain