Butler v. State
Indiana Supreme Court
ERROR to the Vanderburgh Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtBlackford, J.
Indictment for gaming. Plea, not guilty. Verdict and judgment for the state.
The indictment is objected to, because it neither names the person with whom the defendant played, nor states his name to be unknown. Mr. Chilly's language on this subject is as follows: “ It is, in general, necessary to set forth the names of third persons with sufficient certainty; and, therefore, it seems to be generally agreed at this day, that an indictment for suffering divers bakers to bake, &c. against the assize, when that offence was indictable, or for distraining divers persons without just cause, or for…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. StuckyIndiana Supreme Court · 1829
3Cited by9 opinions
- Clark v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1851
- State v. LightOregon Supreme Court · 1889
- State v. MurphySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1892
- Walters v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1910
- Groner v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1855
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.