State v. Ham
South Dakota Supreme Court
Error 1o Circuit Court, Charles Mix County. Hon. E. G. Smith, Judge. John Ham was convicted of larceny, and he brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtCorson, J.
Upon an information duly filed by the state’s attorney of Charles Mix county the defendant was tried and convicted of .the crime of grand larceny. The information, omitting the preliminary allegations, is as follows: “That John Ham, late of said county, Yeoman, on the eleventh day of August, in the year of our Lord one thotisand nine hundred and six, at the county of Charles Mix, and state of South Dakota aforesaid, did willfully and unlawfully and feloniously, and by means of fraud and stealth, and with the intent to deprive another thereof, take, steal, and carry away certain personal…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- State v. ReddingtonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1895
- People v. ViceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- People v. WallaceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- People v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- People v. Leong QuongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. HenrySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1973
- State v. WintersSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1987
- House v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1913
- State v. WintersSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1987