Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 547.270 (2026)

No assignment, or joinder in error, necessary

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  547.270.  No assignment, or joinder in error, necessary. — No assignment of error, or joinder in error, shall be necessary upon any appeal or writ of error, in a criminal case, issued or taken pursuant to the foregoing provisions of this chapter, but the court shall proceed upon the return thereof without delay, and render judgment upon the record before them.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 4150)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 3760; 1919 § 4106; 1909 § 5312

(1964) Since defendant did not file a motion for new trial alleged errors presented in defendant's brief relative to improper cross examination of defense witness and admission of certain evidence were not preserved for review. State v. Kennebrew (Mo.), 380 S.W.2d 293.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 36 cases, 1952–1967 · leading case: State v. Pilkinton, 310 S.W.2d 304 (Mo. Ct. App. 1958).
State v. Pilkinton, 310 S.W.2d 304 (Mo. Ct. App. 1958). · cites it 4× “02 [see also Section 547.270], the sufficiency of the information to charge an offense is one of the questions into which we should inquire [compare State v.”
State v. Mayberry, 272 S.W.2d 236 (Mo. 1954). · cites it 3× “02, Section 547.270 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S.; State v.”
In Re Interest of Ronald C, 314 S.W.2d 756 (Mo. Ct. App. 1958). · cites it 3× “2d 787, 790 ; Section 547.270, RSMo 1949, 39 V.A.M.S. That there may be no misunderstanding on this subject we add these comments.”
State v. Cunningham, 380 S.W.2d 401 (Mo. 1964). · cites it 3× “Section 547.270, RSMo 1959. Woven into points two and three made by defendant can be heard strains of the same given specific reason why the information is considered by him to be invalid and insufficient.”
State v. Mallory, 336 S.W.2d 383 (Mo. 1960). · cites it 3× “§ 547.270. However, it was the duty of the appellant and his counsel upon the trial of the cause to set forth in his motion for a new trial “in detail and with particularity * * * the specific grounds or causes therefor” (V.”
State v. Shriver, 275 S.W.2d 304 (Mo. 1955). · cites it 3× “And see Section 547.270 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S.; State v.”
State v. Swindell, 271 S.W.2d 533 (Mo. 1954). · cites it 3× “Section 547.270 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S.; 42 V.”
State v. Crawford, 251 S.W.2d 76 (Mo. 1952). · cites it 3× “See Section 547.270 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S. The verdict is sufficient, finding defendant guilty as charged in the information, and assessing punishment within the statutory limit for a first offense.”
State v. Butler, 310 S.W.2d 952 (Mo. 1958). “§ 547.270. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court should be and is affirmed.”
State v. Hayzlett, 265 S.W.2d 321 (Mo. 1954). “§ 547.270. : The argument complained of and the circumstances in which ’ it was made ;were these: Counsel for the state and the defense were allotted thirty minutes on ■each side in which to argue the case to the .”
State v. McBrayer, 269 S.W.2d 756 (Mo. 1954). · cites it 3× “In his motion for a new trial defendant has assigned error on the court’s action (1) in refusing to direct a verdict for him as requested at the close of all the evidence; (2) in the admission in evidence of exhibit ■“A”, an alleged confession on the part of defendant; and (3)…”
State v. Kennebrew, 380 S.W.2d 293 (Mo. 1964). · cites it 2× “As a consequence of defendant not filing a motion for a new trial in the trial court, that court was not afforded an opportunity to consider and rule on the alleged errors presented to us in defendant’s briefs.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.