State v. Lashus
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions from superior court. The exceptions were to a pro forma ruling of the court, overruling a demurrer to the following complaint. (Complaint.) "State of Maine. Kennebec, ss. To Horace W. Stewart, Esquire, judge of our municipal court of Waterville, in the county of Kennebec.
Read the full summary
On exceptions from superior court. The exceptions were to a pro forma ruling of the court, overruling a demurrer to the following complaint. (Complaint.) "State of Maine. Kennebec, ss. To Horace W. Stewart, Esquire, judge of our municipal court of Waterville, in the county of Kennebec. James P. Hill, of Waterville, in the county of Kennebec and State of Maine, in behalf of said state, on oath complains, that Levi Lashus of Waterville, in the county of Kennebec, on the twenty-first day of December, A. D. 1886, at said Waterville, in said county of Kennebec, did then and there, knowingly…
1Opinion of the CourtVirgin, J.
The complaint follows the language of the statutory provision (R. S., c. 27, § 31,) which creates the offence intended to be charged; but such a mode of setting out a violation of a penal or criminal statute is not necessarily sufficient. State v. And. R. R. Co. 76 Maine, 411; Com v. Pray, 13 Pick. 359. The law affords to the respondent in a criminal prosecution such a reasonably particular statement of all the essential elements which constitute the intended offence as shall apprise him of the criminal act charged ; and to the end, *543also, that if he again be prosecuted for the same offence he…
2Cited by16 opinions
- State v. CharetteSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1963
- Smith v. StateSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1950
- State v. CasaleSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1952
- State v. StroutSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1933
- Duncan v. StateSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1962
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.