State v. Thomas
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The defendant, who was indicted, tried before a jury, and convicted of perjury in the district court for Blue Earth county, appeals from an order of that court denying his motion for a new trial, and in arrest of judgment, to this court. The case, in respect to the errors complained of, is fully stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Berry, J.
The indictment in this case (a prosecution for perjury) follows form No. 24, section 2, ch. 10S, Gen. Stat. This form is not only prescribed by section 2, but by section 3 of the same chapter it is expressly declared to be “ sufficient in all cases where ” it is applicable.
By this indictment the defendant is certainly “ informed ot the nature and cause of the accusation ” against him, as section 6, art. 1 of our state constitution requires that he shall be, and we perceive no reason why, if this provision of the constitution is satisfied, it is not entirely competent for…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bilansky v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1859
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. ArmingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1878
- State v. SteinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892