State v. Booe
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Lonoke Circuit Court. James S. Thomas, Judge. It was not necessary for the indictment to state that the words and acts of defendant were done in a manner calculated to disturb, insult or interrupt the con-g-reg-ation. Sand. & H. Dig., sec. 1541. The indictment charges appellant with disturbing the congregation by doing certain things, naming them.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lonoke Circuit Court. James S. Thomas, Judge. It was not necessary for the indictment to state that the words and acts of defendant were done in a manner calculated to disturb, insult or interrupt the con-g-reg-ation. Sand. & H. Dig., sec. 1541. The indictment charges appellant with disturbing the congregation by doing certain things, naming them. This is sufficient. 31 Ark. 638; 14 Ind. 219; 47 Ark. 233. It is not necessary to use the exact language of the statute. Sand. & H. Dig., sec. 2088, 2090, 2076. Cited 31 Ark. 638; 19 id. 578; 47 id. 223, 488.
1DissentWood, J.
The indictment charges that the defendant “unlawfully and maliciously and contemptously did disturb and disquiet a religious congregation'' (naming it), “by then and there laughing and talking, and putting his head in the lap of Will Shute, and making remarks upon the sermon as it was being delivered, against the peace and dignity of the State of Arkansas.” It is contended that the indictment is defective because it fails to allege that the words or acts were said and done “in a manner that was calculated to disturb, insult, or interrupt said congregation.” How is it possible for one to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wood v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Feigel v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- State v. HinsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1877
- State v. DeweySupreme Court of Vermont · 1883