State v. Daniels

The evidence offered by the State was amply sufficient to support the verdict. Indeed, defendant made no motion for judgment as in case of nonsuit. Moreover, careful consideration of the assignments of error relating to rulings on evidence and to the charge do not disclose any error of law deemed sufficiently prejudicial to warrant a new trial or to require particular discussion.

Appellant lays major emphasis upon assignments of error relating to the denial by the court of his plea in abatement and motion in arrest of judgment. These assignments present a jurisdictional question, technical in…