Sutton v. State
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the -district court for Washington county. Tried below before Powicll, J. There was a fatal variance between allegations of the information and the proof. (Slate v. Wheeler, 19 Minn. 98; Roade v. Stale, 5 Neb. 174; Millsaps v. Stale, 43 S: W. Rep. [Tex.] 1015; Sullivan v. Stale, 7 Bo. Rep. [Miss.] 275; I-Iaslip v: Slate, 10 Neb. 590; Robinson v. Stale, 43 S. W. Rep. [Tex.] 526; Overly v. Slate, 31 S. W. Rep. [Tex.] 377; Speeht v. Beindorf, 56 Neb. 553; Polo Mfg.
Read the full summary
Error to the -district court for Washington county. Tried below before Powicll, J. There was a fatal variance between allegations of the information and the proof. (Slate v. Wheeler, 19 Minn. 98; Roade v. Stale, 5 Neb. 174; Millsaps v. Stale, 43 S: W. Rep. [Tex.] 1015; Sullivan v. Stale, 7 Bo. Rep. [Miss.] 275; I-Iaslip v: Slate, 10 Neb. 590; Robinson v. Stale, 43 S. W. Rep. [Tex.] 526; Overly v. Slate, 31 S. W. Rep. [Tex.] 377; Speeht v. Beindorf, 56 Neb. 553; Polo Mfg. Oo. v. Parr, 8 Neb. 379; Grimison v. Russell, 14 Neb. 521; Montgomery v. Stale, 12 Tex. App. 323; Hotter v. People, 37 N.…
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, C. J.
An information was filed in the district court of Washington county which contained two counts; in one of which the plaintiff in error was charged with the crime of forgery, and in the second with uttering and publishing a forgery. A motion to quash each count was filed, which was overruled as to the first and sustained as to the second. A trial resulted in a conviction of the accused. Á motion for a new trial was overruled, as was *569also one in'.arrest of judgment, and the defendant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment in the penitentiary. The first count of the information is as follows:
“Be…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Haslip v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by2 opinions
- Balis v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1940
- Poythress v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1911