Worthem v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Mississippi Circuit Court, Chickasawba District; Frank Smith, Judge; 1. The motion to quash should have been sustained. Nash v. State, 73 Ark. 399, is not applicable in this case.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Mississippi Circuit Court, Chickasawba District; Frank Smith, Judge; 1. The motion to quash should have been sustained. Nash v. State, 73 Ark. 399, is not applicable in this case. No witnesses were introduced before the finding of the last indictment. 100 N. C. 539; 53 Ala. 481; 90 N. C. 714. . 2. The grand jury did not vote to return an indictment. 63 N. C. 595; 5 Okl. 61. 1.' The indictment is valid. 73 Ark. 399; 79 Ark. 120; 41 Iowa, 311; 39 Id. 318; 46 Id. 88; 146 111. 175; 24 Ind. 142; 20 Mo. 338. ' The concurrence of twelve grand 'jurors is sufficient; the statute does not…
1Opinion of the CourtBattre, J.
At the December, 1906, term of the Mississippi Circuit Court, Chickasawba District, a regularly impaneled grand jury returned the following indictment into court:
“The grand jury of Mississippi County, -Chickasawba District, in the name and by the authority of the State of Arkansas, accuse Lee Worthem of the crime of murder in the first degree, committed as follows, towit: The said..........in the county and State aforesaid, Chickasawba District, on the 1st day of June', A. D. 1906, did unlawfully, wilfully, feloniously and maliciously, after premeditation and deliberation, assault, kill and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Creek v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1865
- Commonwealth v. CluneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
3Cited by7 opinions
- Oma Roy Eidson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1959
- Latourette v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- State v. FoxSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- McDonald v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- People v. Brinkman, New York County Courts1953
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.