Williams v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Craighead Circuit Court. Hon. W. H. Cate, Circuit Judge. Said indictment is insufficient in law. Two offenses were charged and the court should have required the State to have elected which she would try appellant for. jó Ark., p8. There was no evidence to sustain the verdict. There being no bill of exceptions, appellant must rely solely upon the motion in arrest which questions the sufficiency of the indictment.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Craighead Circuit Court. Hon. W. H. Cate, Circuit Judge. Said indictment is insufficient in law. Two offenses were charged and the court should have required the State to have elected which she would try appellant for. jó Ark., p8. There was no evidence to sustain the verdict. There being no bill of exceptions, appellant must rely solely upon the motion in arrest which questions the sufficiency of the indictment. The indictment is full and meets all the requirements of Sec. 45°7> Mansf. Dig.
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
The first count in the indictment charged an unlicensed sale of a compound of ardent liquor, and was in the usual form except that it did not conclude contra pacem. The second count was in these words :
“And the grand jury aforesaid, in the name and by the authority of the State aforesaid, accuse said Robert Williams of the crime of being interested in the sale of liquor without license, committed as follows, viz: The said Robert Williams, in the county and district aforesaid, on the 10th day of March, 1885, was unlawfully interested in the sale of a compound of ardent liquors, called ‘ lemon…
2Cited by9 opinions
- State v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1969
- Caldwell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1988
- State v. RunyonOregon Supreme Court · 1912
- State v. BossartNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1932
- State v. BunchSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.