Dates v. State

ON REHEARING

CATES, Presiding Judge.

The prosecution argues there is “no chance that the procuring * * * be done accidentally or by mischance.”

We are at a loss to ascribe what meaning was intended by the use of “no chance”. This court is a court of law, not of probabilities.2

Both by State and Federal Constitutions an indictment must inform a defendant of the charges against him. The law of the land is not ready to keep the accused in the dark as to what he is up against until the State rests its case. United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 23 L.Ed. 588. Otherwise he would be like Laocoon…