TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State v. Armstrong

State of Missouri v. Reuben Armstrong

State v. Armstrong, 46 Mo. 588 (1870)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Missouri · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 15, 1870
Judges
Bliss, Other
Citations
46 Mo. 588
Cited by 4
Headnotes
1. Practice — Supreme Court — Transcript — Cleric — Affirmance.—On super-sedeas in a criminal prosecution, where tlio clerk of the trial court sends up the transcript as required by statute (Wagn, Stat. 11M-16, $ 16), but the appellant fails to prosecute his appeal, and the judgment of the lower court appears to be regular, it will be affirmed. But the duty of bringing up the transcript is personal to the clerk, without the application of tlie accused (45 Mo. 153); exA-semble, that where respondent brings in the transcript and moves for an affirmance, on the ground that appellant has failed to file it, the motion will be overruled.
Summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Bliss

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Bliss, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant was convicted of gambling, in the St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction, and fined ten dollars, and the court thereupon allowed an appeal, ordered a stay of proceedings, and took the proper recognizance. The clerk, under the provisions of section 16, pp. 1114-15, Wagner’s Statutes, sent up the transcript, but the appellant fails to prosecute his appeal by presenting a brief of the facts and points upon which he relies, or to appear at all in this court.

At the last term, counsel for the State brought in the transcript and moved an affirmance of the judgment upon the ground that the appellant had not filed it; but the motion was overruled for the reason that where there is a stay of proceedings upon appeal, it is the duty of the clerk, in a criminal action, to send up a transcript without the application of the appellant. (State ex rel. Miller v. Daily, 45 Mo. 153 .) But while it is the duty of the clerk to return the transcript in such cases, it is also the duty of the appellant to prosecute his appeal as in civil cases, except that no assignment of errors is required (Wagn. Stat. 1115, § 20), or the court will be at liberty to affirm the judgment.

*589 We are not advised in regard to the points upon which the appellant relies, and the judgment appears regular and will be affirmed.

The other judges concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 4 cases

View all citing references →
1881–1882: 11893–1894: 11913–1914: 11925–1926: 118812026peak 1881 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State ex rel. Martin v. Wofford25 S.W. 851 (Mo. 1894)
  2. State v. Davidson73 Mo. 428 (1881)
  3. State ex rel. LaRue v. Hitchcock153 S.W. 546 (Mo. Ct. App. 1913)
  4. State ex rel. Lashley v. Ittner292 S.W. 707 (Mo. 1926)

Most recent

  1. State ex rel. Lashley v. Ittner292 S.W. 707 (Mo. 1926)
  2. State ex rel. LaRue v. Hitchcock153 S.W. 546 (Mo. Ct. App. 1913)
  3. State ex rel. Martin v. Wofford25 S.W. 851 (Mo. 1894)
  4. State v. Davidson73 Mo. 428 (1881)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
State ex rel. Miller v. Daily, 45 Mo. 153 (1869) 7

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list