Carleton v. State
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtHouck, J.
“The indictment in this case was returned under favor of Section 12438 GC.
Coming now to the first error relied upon will say that it is urged that the indictment is faulty and defective in substance, because it does not aver that defendant broke' and entered a building, either by using the word “building,” which is the word used in the statute, or any equivalent word. As to this claim, we are not in accord with counsel. An inspection of the language used in the indictment discloses that it is averred that Ben Carleton did unlawfully, maliciously and forcibly break, etc., into a certain…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State Ex Rel. Crabbe v. Indiana, Columbus & Eastern Traction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1927