State v. Sheppard
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the Third Judicial District Court, parish of Lincoln. Gfraham, J. In an indictment for severing from the soil it must he alleged who was the owner of the soil In a charge of larceny there must be some definite value fixed to the property stolen. You cannot cumulate the charges of larceny and severing from the soil. One cannot be convicted ot two offenses for one single act.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Third Judicial District Court, parish of Lincoln. Gfraham, J. In an indictment for severing from the soil it must he alleged who was the owner of the soil In a charge of larceny there must be some definite value fixed to the property stolen. You cannot cumulate the charges of larceny and severing from the soil. One cannot be convicted ot two offenses for one single act. Where there is more than one count in an indictment and the verdict of the jury is “guilty;" there is a conviction upon each count.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Fenner, J.
The defendant assigns the following as errors :
*12171st. The verdict is signed by G. E. MeKinzie without the usual addition of “ Foreman” appended to his signature.
This does not vitiate the verdict, which might even have been rendered orally. 15 An. 648; 32 An. 854.
The record shows that G. F. MeKinzie was a member of the jury.
The foreman is chosen by the jury itself to act as its organ of communication with the Court. When MeKinzie, in presence of the jury, presented the verdict, in their behalf, he acted as foreman with their' knowledge and…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. RoseSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1910
- State v. CarterSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1929
- State v. SlimanSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1929