Schmidt v. State
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Marion Criminal Court.
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion.
Woods, J.
I am constrained to dissent from the conclusion reached by the majority of the court, both as to the definition of the offence, and the manner of charging it. I consider the decision a radical departure from the doctrine often reiterated and heretofore seemingly well settled in this State, that the charging of an offence in the language of the statute which creates it will ordinarily be deemed sufficient. All crimes are statutory in this State, and the importance of the rule is manifest. As early as 1832, in the case of Pelts v. The State, 3 Blackf. 28, the rule…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- The Mary AnnSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Shinn v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
- Malone v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
- State v. BougherIndiana Supreme Court · 1833
- Bates v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1869
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.