Snow v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Johnson Circuit Court; A. B. PricLdy, Judge; 1. The motion to quash the indictment should have been sustained because the names of the witnesses were not endorsed upon it. 33 Ark. 174; Kirby’s Digest, § 2225. 2. It was error to refuse defendant’s motion for a continuance.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Johnson Circuit Court; A. B. PricLdy, Judge; 1. The motion to quash the indictment should have been sustained because the names of the witnesses were not endorsed upon it. 33 Ark. 174; Kirby’s Digest, § 2225. 2. It was error to refuse defendant’s motion for a continuance. Due diligence was shown. 3. The prosecutrix is contradicted in so many ways that the verdict should not stand and the verdict was not the verdict of the jury but a quotient verdict and in any event the punishment should be reduced to the minimum. 34 Ark. 232; 66 Id. 264; 91 Id. 502. 1. It was not error to…
1Opinion of the CourtMoCULLOCH, C. J.
An indictment was returned by the grand jury of Johnson County accusing the defendant Hobart Snow of the crime of rape, committed on the person of Pearl Martin, a young woman about the age of seventeen years. On the trial of the case defendant was convicted of assault with intent to rape and the punishment was fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of fifteen years.
The first ground urged for reversal is that the court erred in refusing to quash the indictment because the names of all the witnesses who appeared before the grand jury were not endorsed on the indictment. The record…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Speer v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1878
3Cited by7 opinions
- National Credit Corporation v. RitcheySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
- McGuffin v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Patton v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934
- Minor v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
- Stewart v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.