Legal Opinion

State v. Oakley

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 15, 1888PublishedCited by 6 opinions

APPEAL from Dallas Circuit Court. C. D. Wood, Judge. This court in the case of State v. Parker, 34 Ark., 158, held that ‘ ‘ twenty-five cords of wood ’ ’ was a sufficient description of the subject of the larceny. For the same reasons given in that case the description of the money in this indictment must be held sufficient.

Read the full summary

APPEAL from Dallas Circuit Court. C. D. Wood, Judge. This court in the case of State v. Parker, 34 Ark., 158, held that ‘ ‘ twenty-five cords of wood ’ ’ was a sufficient description of the subject of the larceny. For the same reasons given in that case the description of the money in this indictment must be held sufficient. No substantial right of the appellee on the merits was, or could be, prejudiced by the failure of the pleader to describe the money as greenbacks, national currency, or gold or silver certificates, all of them being of United States currency, equal in value and passing…

1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.

Appellee was indicted in the Dallas circuit court for larceny. The property charged to be stolen is described in the indictment as “ two ten dollar bills of United States currency.” Is this description sufficient?

In an indictment for larceny, as a general rule, the property taken should be described specifically by the name usually appropriated to it, to distinguish it from other property, or by a description sufficient to show 'the particular kind or species of property alleged to be stolen. It has been adjudged that the description of property stolen, as “one pound of meat,” was…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. MoreyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1853
  2. Martinez v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1874
  3. Merrill v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1871

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. NugentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  2. United States v. JohnstonDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1923
  3. Simon v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1975
  4. Appel v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Cain v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API