The King v. Asina
Hawaii Supreme Court
The prisoners were tried at the last term of this Court before Hartwell,- J., and found guilty of the-charges alleged in the indictment, and thereupon their counsel moved in arrest of judgment, alleging as grounds therefor, 1. That the indictment is double in charging two distinct offences having different penalties. 2. That the indictment is uncertain, as it is impossible to say on which section of Chapter 14 of the Penal Code it is based, and therefore the Court cannot…
Read the full summary
The prisoners were tried at the last term of this Court before Hartwell,- J., and found guilty of the-charges alleged in the indictment, and thereupon their counsel moved in arrest of judgment, alleging as grounds therefor, 1. That the indictment is double in charging two distinct offences having different penalties. 2. That the indictment is uncertain, as it is impossible to say on which section of Chapter 14 of the Penal Code it is based, and therefore the Court cannot pronounce sentence. 3. That the charge should have been under Section 15 of the 16th Chapter of the Penal Code. This motion…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT BY
HARTWELL, J.
The indictment charges breaking and entering a dwelling house by night with intent to steal, and stealing. It is urged that the intent and the larceny are not chargeable under Section 1, Chapter 14, Comp. Penal Code, viz.: “Whoever in the night breaks and enters the dwelling house of another with intent to commit murder, rape, arson, robbery, larceny, or other felony, is guilty of burglary.” The st. ->d section of the same chapter provides that “ to constitute burglary it is not necessary that any crime within the meaning of the above section be committed.”…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bennett v. McCrocklinCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
3Cited by2 opinions
- Territory of Hawaii v. JohnsonHawaii Supreme Court · 1905
- Republic of Hawaii v. AkauHawaii Supreme Court · 1898