Rutledge v. State

ON APPELLANT’S motion for rehearing.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

In his motion for rehearing, appellant presses upon us his intention that the State, having alleged in the indictment that the bigamous marriage occurred in Jefferson County, was required to so prove and that, failing so to do, a variance exists between the allegation and the proof. The proof shows that the bigamous marriage occurred in Hardin County and that the parties thereafter lived together as husband and wife in Jefferson County. The question, then, is whether such facts are sufficient to meet the allegations of the indictment.

Article…