Hamilton v. State

1. That an indictment contained the names of only eighteen grand jurors, among which the same name occurred twice, does not, without more, raise the presumption, that this name in both places referred to one and the same: person.

2. After a conviction on such an indictment, judgment will not be arrested on the ground that only seventeen grand jurors acted, in finding the indictment, nor can such motion be aided by evidence offered to prove that the name which occurred twice in the indictment related to one person only. Motions in arrest of judgment must be predicated upon defects appearing on…