Smith v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentJim Johnson, Associate Justice
I do not agree with tbe majority opinion for two reasons.
First: Tbe sufficiency of tbe information. A defendant is innocent until proven guilty, and tbe indictment must be tested upon a presumption that tbe defendants have no knowledge of tbe facts charged against them. United States v. Westbrook, 114 F. Supp. 192 (DC Ark.), 42 C.J.S. page 893.
To me it appears unreasonable, to say tbe least, to put our stamp of approval on an information such as tbe one in tbis case. An information dealing with manslaughter should be more specific. Tbe reason it should be more specific is because, as far as…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. LassotovitchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1932
- United States v. WestbrookDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1953
- McGough v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Tharp v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Hettle v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.