State v. Papernak
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from Circuit Court, Faulk County.' Hon. Joseph H. Bottum, Judge. The defendant, Michael Papernak, was convicted of the crime of grand larceny, and he appeals. (1) To point one of the opinion, Respondent cited; State v. Fullerton Lumber Co., 152 N. W. (S. D.) 708; State v. 'Sysinger, 125 N. W. ('9. D.) 879. (2) To point two, ‘Respondent cited; People v. Clark, 39 Pac. (Cal.) 53; Com. v. Spencer, Ann. Cas. 1913, D. 552; 16 C. J- 572.
1DissentMcCOY, J.
(dissenting.) I am unable to concur in the majority opinion. I am of the view that the judgment should be reversed on the ground that the information was not sufficient to sustain a conviction. The information was filed in May, 1920, alleging that the crime was committed' in October, 1920, being an impossible date,' subsequent to the filing of the information. This is not a case of uncertainty as to the time when the offense is alleged to 'have been committed, but the information “specifically” and “expressly” states that the offense Was committed in October, 1920. I am of the view that under…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- McKay v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1911
- State v. BurnettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Morgan v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1906
- Murphy v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Terrell v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1905
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.