State v. Flournoy

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Watkins, J.

The defendant was indicted under See. 905 of the Revised Statutes denouncing the crime of embezzlement against an agent, clerk, trustee, mandatary, depositary, etc.

To the indictment the defendant’s counsel filed a motion to quash oil the ground that same “is not sufficient in law;” and the motion having been sustained and the indictment quashed, the State has appealed.

Was the indictment sufficient in law?

The phraseology of the indictment is as follows, viz.:

“That Lem Flournoy, being then and there depositary of J. Thomas, did then and there,…