Case Name: THE STATE v. LEO GARDNER, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Missouri
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1913-05-20
Citations: 250 Mo. 426
Docket Number: 
Parties: THE STATE v. LEO GARDNER, Appellant.
Judges: Roy, C., concurs.
Reporter: Missouri Reports
Volume: 250
Pages: 426–427

Head Matter:
THE STATE v. LEO GARDNER, Appellant.
Division Two,
May 20, 1913.
1. NO BILL OF EXCEPTIONS. Where no bill of exceptions is filed, there is nothing before the court except the record proper, and if that is free from error the judgment will be affirmed.
2. INDICTMENT: Manslaughter in Fourth Degree: Careless Driving of Automobile. An indictment charging manslaughter in the fourth degree, death having resulted from the careless driving of an automobile, is held good upon the authority of State v. Watson, 216 Mo. 424.
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.- — Hon. Wilson A. Taylor, Judge.
Affirmed.
Grant Gillispie for appellant.
Jolm T. Barker, Attorney-General, and Thomas J. Higgs, Assistant Attorney-General, for tlie State.

Opinion:
WILLIAMS, C.
Defendant was tried and found guilty in the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, under an indictment charging manslaughter in the fourth degree in that defendant caused the instant death of one Jesse B. Williams by feloniously, carelessly, recklessly, and with culpable negligence, driving an automobile against and upon him. The punishment assessed was a fine of five hundred dollars, and defendant appealed.
Defendant failed to file any bill of exceptions, and we are therefore limited in our review to the record proper. The indictment charges the offense in the same language employed in the information set forth in the opinion in the case of State v. Watson, reported in the 216 Mo., at page 420, l. c. 424. In the Watson case the sufficiency of the information is fully discussed, and held to he in proper and sufficient form.
Other portions of the record proper are complete, showing all formal and proper requirements, and the same are free from error.
The judgment is affirmed.
Roy, C., concurs.
PER CURIAM. — The foregoing opinion of Williams, C., is adopted as the opinion of the court.
All the judges concur.