Commonwealth v. Nutter
| Decision Date | 26 June 1852 |
| Citation | 49 Va. 699 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. NUTTER. |
| Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
1. What a sufficient entry on the record of the finding an indictment for a misdemeanor by a grand jury.
2. What a good indictment for attempting to commit a felony.
At the April term 1851 of the Circuit court of Ritchie, the record states that the grand jury " returned into Court, and among other things, presented an indictment against Thomas Nutter for felonious assault and battery." " A true bill."
The indictment contained five counts:
The first charged that Thomas Nutter on the 22d day of February 1851 in the county aforesad with malice aforethought, in and upon one David Kuner then and there being, feloniously unlawfully and wilfully did make an assault and with a certain knife which he the said Thomas Nutter in his hand then and there held, and had drawn and open, feloniously wilfully and unlawfully did attempt to stab, strike at and cut with said knife, with intent in so doing, wilfully and of his malice aforethought to kill and murder the said David Kuner, contrary to the form of the statute & c.
The second count charged an assault with a knife with intent feloniously, wilfully and unlawfully and of his malice aforethought to kill and murder the said Kuner.
The third count charged the assault with a club as in the first count; and the fourth count charged the assault with a club as in the second count.
The fifth count charged that the said Thomas Nutter with malice aforethought in and upon David Kuner then and there being feloniously, wilfully, and unlawfully did make an assault and with a certain knife which he the said Thomas Nutter in his left hand then and there had and held, being drawn and open, feloniously, wilfully and unlawfully did attempt to stab, strike at and cut with said knife, with intent then and there feloniously and unlawfully to commit the crime of murder upon the body of the said David Kuner, had he not been prevented and arrested from so doing, contrary to the form of the statute & c.
The prisoner upon being arraigned moved the Court to quash the indictment; but the Court overruled the motion, with liberty to the prisoner to renew it at the next term of the Court. The prisoner thereupon pleaded " not guilty; " and the case was continued.
At the next term of the Court the prisoner moved for leave to withdraw his plea of " not guilty," which was granted. And thereupon he moved the...
To continue reading
Request your trial