Legal Opinion

Brough v. State of Arizona

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided October 23, 1939No. Criminal No. 877PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLockwood, J.

— Dale Brough, hereinafter called defendant, was informed ag’ainst by the county attorney of Maricopa county for the crime of burgiary. The information sufficiently charged the offense, but did not in any manner, directly or indirectly, allege whether the burglary was committed in the daytime or the nighttime. Defendant was tried to a jury. Two verdicts were given the jury by the court, one of which read:

“We, the jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above entitled cause on our oaths do find the defendant guilty.”

And the- other was in the following language:

“We, the jury, duly empanelled and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McLane v. TerritoryArizona Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Hampston v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Buffehr v. Territory of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court · 1907

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. BradyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965
  2. State v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
  3. State v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API