Legal Opinion

State v. Murphy

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided March 12, 1928No. 29085PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSt. Paul, J.

The defendant was convicted of stealing cattle. His appeal presents twelve bills of exception.

Bill No. 1 was reserved to the overruling of a motion to quash the indictment on the ground that it was not signed by the district attorney. The bill is without merit. “There is no law in this state requiring the district attorney to sign a bill of indictment.” State v. Crenshaw, 45 La. Ann. 496, 12 So. 628.

Bills Nos. 2, 3, and 4 relate to the relevancy of certain testimony offered by the state and admitted by the court over the objection of the defendant. The bills do not' show that the testimony…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. LouviereSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1928
  2. State v. CrenshawSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1893

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. RobinsonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2011
  2. State v. GendusaSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API