State v. Murphy
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to Mobile Circuit court. This was an indictment for selling spirituous liquor i to a slave, without the permission of the owner. A motion.was made .to quash the indictment in the court below, because, 1. The indictment does not show that the grand jury who found the bill were then and there empanneled, charged and sworn, thereby omitting a venire to the jury; 2. That the indictment does not contain the names of the grand jurors.
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The objections to the indictment cannot be sustained. The venire to the grand jury, as well as the names of the grand jurors, constitute a part of the caption, and need not be introduced in the indictment. In the case referred to, of The People vs. Gunnsey, (3 Johnson’s Cases,) the objection was to the caption, not to the body of the indictment.
The judgment is affirmed.
2Cited by6 opinions
- Noles v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1854
- Flanigan v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
- Collins v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1912
- Overton v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Reeves v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.