Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
D was elected to the office of prosecuting attorney in 1938, 1940 and 1942. P's report summarizes charges for the years 1941 and 1942. P claims that D willfully, knowingly, continuously, corruptly and unlawfully neglected, failed and refused to investigate, commence prosecutions of and prosecute various persons (95 persons named in the Information) for violations of the Liquor Control Act and Non-Intoxicating Beer Laws of Missouri. P claims that D dismissed and caused to be dismissed various criminal cases (none designated by name or number in the Information) pending against persons charged in said county with felonies and misdemeanors. P said that D refused to commence and prosecute criminal actions against persons who set up, kept and operated certain named gambling machines and devices and those who openly advertised and conducted lotteries (but none were listed by name). P brought a quo warranto action requesting D's removal from office. The Commissioner made findings of proper handling by D of 68 of the specific cases cited by P. The Commissioner made general findings of good faith as to all the others. The Commissioner found that D was an able and diligent prosecuting attorney, working many nights in his office, personally handling the Circuit Court docket, personally trying all capital cases and all difficult jury cases; that since January 1939 his office handled to disposition 27,502 misdemeanor cases (convictions 55% in 1939, 63% in 1940, 65% in 1941, 70% in 1942) and since January 1939, obtained convictions in 341 felony cases, in only 17 felony cases were there acquittals; that D has filed 445 prosecutions for liquor law violations of which 114 were filed in 1941 and 1942, and 81 in 1943; that on one occasion D received transcripts of 71 reported violations of the liquor laws (from the former Supervisor) and prosecutions were filed on all of said reported 71 violations, but the results thereof were only indifferent (many were acquitted by juries); that in 1941 and 1942 respondent's office tried 64 cases of liquor law violations, in which there were 31 convictions and 33 defendants were acquitted or discharged. . . . 'that the civil and criminal dockets for the four divisions of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County were badly congested; that each of said divisions of said Circuit Court generally devoted but one week during each of its three terms a year to the trial of criminal causes; that capital cases, cases wherein the defendants were not out on bond, and rape, murder, kidnapping, burglary, and robbery cases were given preference by the courts in the setting of criminal cases for trial; that many criminal cases were continued from term to term for lack of time to try them; that trials of liquor cases could be obtained much more quickly in the Justice of the Peace courts than in the Circuit Courts; and that to add a further number of liquor violation cases to the Circuit Court dockets would delay the trial of such liquor violation cases for three or four terms.' The Commissioner found for D and P appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co