Sellers v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
From the Circuit Court of Bullock; Tried before the Hon. J. McCaleb Wiley. In this case there is no bill of exceptions, no writ of error, and no assignment of errors on the record.
Read the full summary
From the Circuit Court of Bullock; Tried before the Hon. J. McCaleb Wiley. In this case there is no bill of exceptions, no writ of error, and no assignment of errors on the record. The indictment, as set out in the transcript, is correctly copied in the opinion delivered by Peck, C. J., except in the use of the word “ knowing,” instead of “ having,” as stated in the opinion dedelivered by Peters, C. J. The former opinion was delivered at the January Term, 1873, and the latter at the succeeding June Term.
1Opinion of the CourtPeck, C. J.
— The indictment in this case was found under § 3710 R. C., which is in the following words: “ Any person who buys, receives, conceals, or aids in concealing any personal property whatever, knowing that it has been stolen, and not having the intent to restore it to the owner, must, on conviction, be punished as if he had stolen it.” This section creates a new offence, and describes its constituents. In such a case, all that is required is, that the offence be- charged in the language of the statute. See Shepherd’s Digest, p. 77, § 90.
The indictment is in the following words, omitting the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Jolly v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1923
- Brown v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1916
- CARDIELBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2009
- Fulton v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1913
- Gholson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875