State v. Seamons
Supreme Court of Iowa
Error, to Wapello District Court. for the state. 1st. Figures at common iaw do not vitiate an indictment, and as we have no statute on the subject, of course the common law rule must govern, 1 Chit. Cr. L. 175 and note ; Rev. Slat. p. 541, $ 8. 2d. If the language of the statute is employed, the indictment is sufficient, 8 Muss. 64-8; 2 Scam. 338; 3 ib. 474; 9 Ohio, 135; 11 ib. 70; Rev. Stat. p. 153, §46; ib. p. 169, § 20 ; 3 Blkf. 308. 3d.
Read the full summary
Error, to Wapello District Court. for the state. 1st. Figures at common iaw do not vitiate an indictment, and as we have no statute on the subject, of course the common law rule must govern, 1 Chit. Cr. L. 175 and note ; Rev. Slat. p. 541, $ 8. 2d. If the language of the statute is employed, the indictment is sufficient, 8 Muss. 64-8; 2 Scam. 338; 3 ib. 474; 9 Ohio, 135; 11 ib. 70; Rev. Stat. p. 153, §46; ib. p. 169, § 20 ; 3 Blkf. 308. 3d. If the offence is defined in such language as will enable the defendant to plead a former acquittal or conviction, it is sufficient, 2 Scam. 235; Morris,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Greene, J.
Indictment with intent to inflict a bodily injury. The first count, so far as applicable to the present inquiry, charges “ that Albert H. Seamans, of, &c., on the seventh day of November, A. D., 1847, with force and arms, at, &c., did unlawfully, wilfully, and feloniously, make an assault upon Henderson Boggs with a deadly weapon, with an intent then and there to inflict upon, &o., a bodily injury, without any considerable provocation appearing, against the peace,” &c. The second count contains all the material averments of the first, with the additional charge that the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. HodgedenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1831
- Finch v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1843