Curtis v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Clark Circuit Court. Hon. T. G. T. Steel, Circuit Judge. We submit that the court erred in overruling the motion for a now trial. See Chap. Dig. 120; 2 Wharton, 294.7, and Stewart v. State, 13 Ark. 74.9. Fraudulent practice is not a felony under our statute; 224, Chaps. New Dig.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Clark Circuit Court. Hon. T. G. T. Steel, Circuit Judge. We submit that the court erred in overruling the motion for a now trial. See Chap. Dig. 120; 2 Wharton, 294.7, and Stewart v. State, 13 Ark. 74.9. Fraudulent practice is not a felony under our statute; 224, Chaps. New Dig. There are no grades in it as in larceny; McKenzie v. State, 6 Eng, 594; People v. Haynes, 14 Wendell, 572 3; 11 Wend. 18. Criminal and penal statutes must be construed strictly, and that construction given them that is most favorable to the defendant; 4 John. N. Y. E. 296; Sedgwick on Statutory Law, 324-5…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCluke, C. J.
Curtis was indicted in the circuit court of Clark county, for fraudulent practices; tided, found guilty and sentenced to the penitentiary for two years. A motion for a new trial was made upon the following grounds:
Eirst. Because said verdict is against the law and the evidence.
Second. Because the court instructed the jury contrary to law, or made remarks in regard to the law of the case, which were erroneous, and were taken by the jury as instructions.
Third. Because the panel, from which the jury was selected, was selected by the sheriff, who was not sworn by the court as required by section…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Harman v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1824
- Ex parte TuckerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1869
3Cited by3 opinions
- Porter v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
- Davis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1931
- Gribble v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934