Compton v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Lee Circuit Court; Hance N. Hutton, Judge; 1. The motion in arrest of judgment should have been sustained. Embezzlement being purely a statutory offense, no offense is stated if there is no statute covering the particular charge in the indictment. In this case section 1837 of Kirby’s Digest could not be applicable because that statute does not apply to public officers, nor agents of any public or municipal corporation.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lee Circuit Court; Hance N. Hutton, Judge; 1. The motion in arrest of judgment should have been sustained. Embezzlement being purely a statutory offense, no offense is stated if there is no statute covering the particular charge in the indictment. In this case section 1837 of Kirby’s Digest could not be applicable because that statute does not apply to public officers, nor agents of any public or municipal corporation. The term “incorporated company” applies only to private corporations. 22 N. Y. 243. Even if it be held to apply to an officer of a public corporation, still, under…
1DissentMcCulloch, C. J.
I agree with the majority that, for the reasons stated in the opinion, the indictment can not be sustained under section 1837 of Kirby’s Digest. It appears to have been prepared under section 1842, but it can not be sustained under that statute for several reasons; first, that school directors do not fall within the terms of the statute, nor are they custodians of any public funds, and the indictment does not contain the required allegation that appellant had taken the oath of office. Wood v. State, 47 Ark. 488. It is now held by this court that the indictment is good under section 1839,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Wood v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Dotson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1888
- Settles v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909