State v. Little
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an indictment against the respondent, upon which he was tried and convicted in the County Court. After which a motion in arrest was filed, and overruled in that court. And that decision was brought up for a revision in this Court.
Read the full summary
This was an indictment against the respondent, upon which he was tried and convicted in the County Court. After which a motion in arrest was filed, and overruled in that court. And that decision was brought up for a revision in this Court. The substance of the indictment was, “ That one Seaver Lit- “ tie, of Chelsea, in the said County of Orange, on the night of “ the 25th day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand “ eight hundred and twenty-six, with force and arms, at Washing- “ ton, in the said County of Orange, the public burying-ground, “ near the west meeting-house, in said…
1Opinion of the CourtHutchinson, J.
The slat-ute of this state, (see page 275,) enacts, concerning the offence with which the defendant is charged, “ that, if any person, or persons, shall dig u.p, remove, or disturb, the remains of any dead person, interred within this state,” he shall be punished so andso„
This indictment is not drawn with great caution. It does not attempt to charge the defendant in the words of the statute. Nor was that necessary, if other words equivalent were inserted. It is objected to the indictment, that it neither adopts the words of the statute, nor those that are equivalent. The indictment, instead…
2Cited by11 opinions
- State v. HeatonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- State v. HarrounSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Hollingsworth v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1917
- State v. . HeatonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- State v. MillsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.