Legal Opinion

State v. Puckett

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided June 30, 1913No. 8585PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Read the full summary

Before Prince, J., Laurens, January term, 1913. Indictment against Rich Puckett for burglary. Defendant appeals. cite: Common lazo burglary: 2 Bish., Sec. 91; 12 S. C. 568; 2 Whar., Sec. 971; Clark’s Crim. L., Sec. 100. Piazza not a part of the dzoelling: 39 Ala. 679; 6 Words and Phrases, 5376. Indictment must set forth every fact necessary to constitute crime: 2 Whar. 1229 ;.6 Cyc. 199, 220, 231; Clark Cr. Pro. 162; 14 S. C. 353; 1 Rich. 184, 18 S. C. 138; 45 S. C. 488; 47 S. C. 5. Entering door ajar or window partly raised: 2 Bish. Cr. D., Sec. 91; 2 Whar., Sec. 971; 32 S. C. 21; 13 Ived.…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

The defendant-appellant was tried and convicted in the Court of General Sessions for Laurens County, on January, 1913, on a charge of burglary. He was charged with breaking and entering the dwelling house of W. R. Richey, in the night time, with intent of committing- a felony, on September 22, 1912. After conviction, a motion for a new trial was made by appellant, which was overruled and after sentence, appellant appeals and alleges ten specifications of error on the part of his Honor. The first five exceptions allege error on the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

Henry v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1866

3Cited by5 opinions

Smith v. First Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 1959
State v. StoneSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
State v. MitchellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1914
State v. StorgeeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1982
Milton v. Bank of NewbornCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923