State v. PearsonState v. Pearson
WHITE, C.—On information filed November 14, 1920, in the Circuit Court of Pemiscot County, defendant was charged with illegal voting on the second day of
I. By his plea of guilty the defendant confessed only the truth of the facts stated in the information. It
II. The information charged that on the —— day of November, 1920, while an election was being held in Virginia Township, Pemiscot County, State of Missouri (setting out the different offices, national, state and county for which the election was being held), the defendant appeared at polling precinct No. 1 of Virginia Township of Pemiscot County, falsely applied for and received a ballot, and cast said ballot at said election. Then the information states the offense thus:
“Without having a lawful right to vote therein, in this, to-wit: That he the said Isaac Pearson was not then and there a resident and qualified voter in said election precinct of said township in said county, and was not then and there a citizen of Pemiscot County, Missouri, for a period of one year before the date of said election, all of which the said Isaac Pearson then and there well knew.”
Apparently the information attempts to charge an offense in violation of
It will be noticed that the information does not charge that Pearson was not a resident of the State one year next before the election, but that he was not a resident of Pemiscot County. A voter is not required to be a resident of the county for more than sixty days. It further says that he was not a resident at the time “in said election precinct in said Virginia Township.” The statute does not require that he shall live in the precinct in which he voted, but only that he shall vote in the township in which he resides. The information fails to charge that defendant was an illegal voter either in not having resided in the State for the requisite time, or in the county for the requisite time, or in failing to reside in the township in which he sought to vote. The information, therefore, charges no offense.
The judgment is reversed and the defendant discharged. Railey and Mozley, CC., concur.
PER CURIAM:—The foregoing opinion by White, C., is adopted as the opinion of the court. All of the judges concur.