State v. Briggs
Supreme Court of Vermont
Indictment for forgery. The material portion of the indictment is sufficiently set forth in the opinion of the Court. The respondent demurred to the indictment, but the County Court for Chittenden County, at the September Term, 1859, Bennett, J., presiding, adjudged the indictment sufficient, to which the respondent excepted.
1Opinion of the CourtAldis, J.
The indictment alleges that the respondent forged “a certain writing, purporting to be a bond, with a condition thereto annexed, signed, sealed, and executed by A. B. Cooper, Robert Russell, and Jos. Whipple, and dated Jan. 8, ’53, with intent to injure and defraud the said Cooper, Russell, and Whipple and avers that the grand jurors can not more particularly describe the bond because it is in the possession of the respondent. Is this a sufficient averment of facts to constitute the crime of forgery ?
It is a fundamental rule, in criminal pleadings, that all the material facts which constitute…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. ShallCourt Of Oyer And Terminer New York · 1829
- People v. KingsleyNew York Supreme Court · 1824
3Cited by14 opinions
- People v. TomlinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Rembert v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- Brazil v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- State v. EvansMontana Supreme Court · 1895
- State v. LotonoWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1907
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.