Arthur v. Commonwealth
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 9 —INDICTMENT APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. If the facts charged in the indictment' do not constitute a felony under our statutes, the motion in arrest of judgment should have been sustained, because at common law .house-breaking was only a misdemeanor. ((Mullins v. Commonwealth, 14 Ky.
Read the full summary
Case 9 —INDICTMENT APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. If the facts charged in the indictment' do not constitute a felony under our statutes, the motion in arrest of judgment should have been sustained, because at common law .house-breaking was only a misdemeanor. ((Mullins v. Commonwealth, 14 Ky. Law Rep.,' 569.) 2. The facts charged in the indictment do not constitute a felony by virtue of section 1162, because it is not charged that anything of value was taken from the house. 3. They do not constitute a felony under section 1164, because the provisions of that section do not apply to…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE LEWIS
DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE COURT.
Appellant was indicted, tried and convicted of the crime of housebreaking, alleged to have been committed by his unlawfully and feloniously breaking and entering into a room occupied by Mrs. Kate Williams' as part of her dwelling house, with the felonious intent to steal therefrom property of value.
At the trial he moved the court to instruct the jury to acquit him; but his motion was overruled. He also made a motion in arrest of judgment, which was likewise overruled.
As there is no bill of evidence before this court, the only question to decide is…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Barnett v. HartCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1902