State v. Ferry
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an indictment for impeding an officer in' the discharge of his duty, and was heard on general demurrer at the-April Term, 1889, Ross, J., presiding. The demurrer was overruled, pro forma, and the respondents excepted.
Read the full summary
This was an indictment for impeding an officer in' the discharge of his duty, and was heard on general demurrer at the-April Term, 1889, Ross, J., presiding. The demurrer was overruled, pro forma, and the respondents excepted. The following was the indictment: “ State of Yermont, ) Lamoille County, ss. \ Be it remembered that at a term of the County Court begum and holden at Hyde Bark, within and for the said County of Lamoille, on the first Tuesday of December, A. D. 1888, the grand jurors within and for the body »f the County of Lamoille aforesaid, now here in court, duly empaneled and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Taft, J.
I. It is sufficiently alleged that Stevens was a «deputy sheriff; no further allegation in that respect is necessary. State v. Hooker, 17 Vt. 671.
II. The indictment is not bad for duplicity; it charges the Respondents with assaulting Stevens and by so assaulting him that they impeded him in the execution of his office. It was necessary that the pleader should set forth the manner in which the officer was impeded, and if by assault, it should be so alleged.
III. The indictment sufficiently sets forth the manner in which ’Stevens was attempting to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. HookerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- State v. DaggettSupreme Court of Vermont · 1826