State v. Labore
Supreme Court of Kansas
Appeal from Decatur district court; William H. Pratt, judge.
1Per curiam
It may be conceded that the information was defective in form because it charged the offense in general terms, and if the attention of the court had been called to this the state would doubtless have been required to make the charge more definite. The motion to quash set up the usual grounds in general terms. When asked by the court to point out the de*203fects in the information counsel for the appellant declined to do so, saying that the motion was formal and that he knew of no particular defect. By declining to enlighten the court in respect of his contentions he must be held to have waived…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. EverettSupreme Court of Kansas · 1900
- State v. RatnerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1890