State v. Griffin
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Bell. Tried below before the Hon. J. P. Osterhout. The opinion quotes the charging portion of the indictment.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Bell. Tried below before the Hon. J. P. Osterhout. The opinion quotes the charging portion of the indictment. The defendant excepted to the indictment upon the ground that it was too vague and indefinite, 1. Because it did not state the act which constituted the offense alleged to have been committed. 2. Because it did not state the place, when, or circumstances under which, the offense was committed with sufficient certainty to enable the defendant to plead a judgment on it in bar of a second prosecution for the same offense. These exceptions were overruled, verdict guilty, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Devine, Associate Justice.
The indictment charged that appellee, “ in the county of Bell, in said State of Texas, on the 24th day of December, anno Domini one thousand eight hundred and seventy-three, did then and there designedly make an obscene and indecent exhibition of his person in public, contrary to law and against the peace and dignity of the State.” This indictment was sufficient. In the language of Chief Justice Roberts, in the case of John C. Moffit, charged with indecent exposure or exhibition of his person, and decided at this term, “ it is generally sufficient and proper in…
2Cited by5 opinions
- State v. BauguessSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- Commonwealth v. McCanceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- State v. PerrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Rosen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Rosen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896