Gibson v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Indictment for simple larceny; from Miller superior court— Judge Worrill. November 30, 1913.
1Opinion of the CourtBussell, J.
The court did not err in overruling the demurrer to the indictment.
la) Where a timely demand is made by special demurrer, one indicted for simple larceny is entitled to have such a definite and particular description of property alleged to have been stolen as will enable him to *68know the exact transaction in which it is claimed he violated the law; but a description of the property as “one metal church bell” belonging to a named church, is sufficiently definite to withstand a special demurrer which does not itself specify in what respect the description should be more minute.
Decided July 8,…
2Cited by11 opinions
- State v. ThorntonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
- State v. CampbellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2016
- Martin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1950
- Stewart v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1968
- Norman v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.