State v. Ring
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Sharp Circuit Court, Southern District; John W. Meeks, Judge; A negative averment need not follow the words of the statute, as an affirmative one must; but any negation in general terms, covering the entire substance of the matter, will suffice. 1 Bish. Crim. Proc. (3.Ed.), § 641; 34 Me. 503; 103 Mass. 213; Bish.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Sharp Circuit Court, Southern District; John W. Meeks, Judge; A negative averment need not follow the words of the statute, as an affirmative one must; but any negation in general terms, covering the entire substance of the matter, will suffice. 1 Bish. Crim. Proc. (3.Ed.), § 641; 34 Me. 503; 103 Mass. 213; Bish. Stat. Crim. 485. Since the exception in the statute is in the enacting clause, the indictment should have contained such an averment as to show that the defendant was without its terms. Bishop’s Crim. Proc. (3 Ed.), 636; 18 Vt. 195; 2 Pick. 139; 54 Ark. 546; 58 Ark. 39.
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, J.
The State appeals from a ruling of the circuit court sustaining a demurrer to an indictment against the defendant, Wesley Ring, charging him with the offense of carrying a pistol.
The indictment, omitting the caption and formal part, is as follows:
“The said Wesley Ring, in the State, county and district aforesaid, on the 10th day of july, 1904, did unlawfully carry a pistol as a weapon, the said pistol not being such a pistol as is commonly used in the army and navy of the United States.”
It will be observed that the indictment does not follow the language of the statute, which excepts “such…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wilson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1878
- Railway Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
- Matthews v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1866
- Bone v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1856
- State v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1891
3Cited by3 opinions
- Henderson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- McDonald v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- State v. EisenOregon Supreme Court · 1909