Arnold v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Conway Circuit Court. William L. Moose, Judge. A teacher’s license is not tbe subject of forgery and uttering. Sand. & II. Dig. § 1593; 6 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law (2d ed.), 288; 87 Ga. 429, 431. The act charged was harmless. 13 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law (2d ed.), 1102. The court should have given written instructions. Const, art. 7, § 23; 47 Ark. 410; 51 Ark. 184; 11 Am. & Eng. Enc.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Conway Circuit Court. William L. Moose, Judge. A teacher’s license is not tbe subject of forgery and uttering. Sand. & II. Dig. § 1593; 6 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law (2d ed.), 288; 87 Ga. 429, 431. The act charged was harmless. 13 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law (2d ed.), 1102. The court should have given written instructions. Const, art. 7, § 23; 47 Ark. 410; 51 Ark. 184; 11 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law (2d ed.), 261; 28 Ind. 394. Request made when the court began instructing was in time. 76 Ind. 374; 3 Bush, 532; 47 Conn. 75; 11 Ela. 295; 13 Ela. 648; 61 Ga. 407; 47 Ark. 410. There was no error in the…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
The grand jury of Conway county indicted J. W. Arnold for uttering and publishing as true to W. D. Koonce, treasurer of said county, a certain forged and counterfeited teacher’s license, purporting to be “issued to J. W. Arnold, bearing date September 24, 1901, numbered 102, grade numbered two, and signed by J. H. Reynolds, county examiner for Conway county, Arkansas,” with the intent then and there to feloniously defraud, and obtain the property of, said W. D. Koonce, said Conway county, and School District No. 54 of said county, well knowing that the same- was forged and counterfeited. He…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- National Lumber Co. v. SnellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Mazzia v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1888
3Cited by2 opinions
- Richardson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. LeamonsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907