TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State v. Myers

State of Missouri v. Peters Myers

State v. Myers, 63 Mo. 324 (1876)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Missouri · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 15, 1876
Judges
Other, Sherwood
Citations
63 Mo. 324
Headnotes
1. Indictment — Broker's license — Failure to obtain., application for. etc. — One dealing in bills of exchange etc., without obtaining the license required by the statute, (Wagn. Stat. p. 2H, § I) cannot shield himself from its penalties by showing that he made application for license and tendered the tax, as provided bylaw. See State vs. Jamison. (23 Mo. 330.)
Summary
Appeal from Barton Circuit Court.

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

Opinion of the Court — Sherwood

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

Sherwood, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant was indicted for dealing in bills of exchange &c., &c. without having obtained a license so to do. He was convicted of the charge, and now relies for reversal on the point that the court improperly excluded evidence offered by him, to show that he had made due application to the collector in the manner required by law and had tendered him the requisite sum of money, but the officer refused to issue a license as it was his duty to do. There was no error in rejecting such evidence.

The law (Wagn. Stat. § 1, p. 247) applies to all who carry on the business of dealing in, or buying, or 'selling, or shaving any kind of bills of exchange, checks, drafts &c., &c. * * *' “without a license for that purpose continuing in force,” and punishment must follow an infraction of the law, regardless of the reason which prevented a license from being obtained or the motive actuating the officer'who, in dereliction of his duty, refused to grant it. The same view as here announced was taken by this court in relation to a dram-shop license, which the county court' refused to grant. State vs. Jamison ( 23 Mo. 330 ).

The judgment of the court below is therefore affirmed.

All the other judges concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1879–1880: 21881–1882: 11889–1890: 11905–1906: 11907–1908: 11951–1952: 118792026peak 1879 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. City of St. Louis v. Sternberg69 Mo. 289 (1879)
  2. State v. Bennett102 Mo. 356 (1890)
  3. City of Montpelier v. Mills85 N.E. 6 (Ind. 1908)
  4. State v. Nagle91 A.2d 397 (Me. 1952)
  5. Koch v. Commonwealth84 S.W. 533 (Ky. Ct. App. 1905)
  6. City of Kansas v. Flanders71 Mo. 281 (1879)

Most recent

  1. State v. Nagle91 A.2d 397 (Me. 1952)
  2. City of Montpelier v. Mills85 N.E. 6 (Ind. 1908)
  3. Koch v. Commonwealth84 S.W. 533 (Ky. Ct. App. 1905)
  4. State v. Bennett102 Mo. 356 (1890)
  5. In re Watson15 F. 511 (D. Vt. 1882)
  6. City of Kansas v. Flanders71 Mo. 281 (1879)

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 v. Jamison, 23 Mo. 330 (1856) 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