Calloway v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Miller Circuit Court; George B. Eaynie, Judge; 1. As to the merits of the case, the judgment must be affirmed because .appellant has failed to preserve his rights by having his bill of exceptions authenticated and filed within the time allowed by the court. 117 Ark. 154. 2. A bill of exceptions does bring into the record the question .as to whether or not the foreman of the grand jury, who returned the indictment, was qualified to act.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Miller Circuit Court; George B. Eaynie, Judge; 1. As to the merits of the case, the judgment must be affirmed because .appellant has failed to preserve his rights by having his bill of exceptions authenticated and filed within the time allowed by the court. 117 Ark. 154. 2. A bill of exceptions does bring into the record the question .as to whether or not the foreman of the grand jury, who returned the indictment, was qualified to act. The 'court’s finding that he was qualified is clearly sustained (by the evidence. But the indictment was good, .and the motion to quash was…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
Appellant was convicted of murder in the second degree. There is no bill of exceptions in the record containing the proceedings during the trial— at least, the bill of exceptions is not authenticated in any manner, and can not be considered in the case.
There is, however, one question for consideration, which is brought up by .a duly lauthenticated bill of exceptions. That relates to a motion to quash the indictment on the ground that a member of the grand jury was not a qualified elector of the county. The statute provides, however, that “no indictment shall be void or voidable (because any…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Dickerson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Pool v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- St. Clair v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923