Legal Opinion

State v. Packard

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1871PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from Wasco County. The defendant was indicted under § 636 of the Criminal Code, which provides as follows: “If any officer of this State, or of any county, town, or other municipal or public corporation therein, * * * shall willfully and knowingly charge, take or receive any fee or compensation, other than that authorized or permitted by law, for any official service or duty performed by such officer, * * * such officer, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by…

Read the full summary

Appeal from Wasco County. The defendant was indicted under § 636 of the Criminal Code, which provides as follows: “If any officer of this State, or of any county, town, or other municipal or public corporation therein, * * * shall willfully and knowingly charge, take or receive any fee or compensation, other than that authorized or permitted by law, for any official service or duty performed by such officer, * * * such officer, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary not less than six months nor more than one year, or by fine not less than fifty nor more…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

Upton, J.:

The case turns upon the sufficiency of the indictment. It is insisted on the part of the State that the offense is described in the language of the statute, and Wharton’s Am. Or. L. § 364, is cited to show that that mode of charging the acts that constitute the crime is sufficient. That author *160says: “It is a well-settled general rule that in an indictment for an offense created by statute it is sufficient to describe tlie offense in the words of the statute;” and the position is undoubtedly correct as a general rule. The question whether the offense is described in the…

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. ShawOregon Supreme Court · 1892
  2. State v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1948
  3. State v. JimCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973
  4. State v. SamOregon Supreme Court · 1887
  5. State v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1909

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API