Carden v. State
| Decision Date | 22 May 1890 |
| Citation | 7 So. 801,89 Ala. 130 |
| Parties | CARDEN v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from criminal court, Jefferson county; S.E. GREENE, Judge.
The indictment in this case charged that the defendant, Henry Carden, "feloniously took and carried away, from the person of Tom Powell, one ten-dollar bill and one five-dollar bill, in money of the United States of America, a more particular description of which is to the grand jury unknown the same being of the value of fifteen dollars, and the personal property of said Tom Powell." The bill of exception states that the defendant demurred to the indictment, and that his demurrer was overruled; but the judgment entry only recites that the trial was on issue joined on the plea of not guilty. On the trial, Powell having testified to the loss of his money, and stated circumstances tending to criminate the defendant, added Defendant's counsel then asked the witness: "What did you tell the grand jury about it?" The court sustained an objection to this question, and the defendant thereupon excepted. The defendant also requested several charges to be given to the jury, based on the assumption that the grand jury knew, or by due diligence might have known, a more particular description of the money; and he duly excepted to the refusal of these charges.
W. L. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.
When the larceny charged is of bills, intended to circulate as money, the description may be general; an indictment which describes them by kind, denomination, and value is sufficient. The indictment charges defendant with having feloniously taken and carried away, "from the person of Tom Powell, one ten-dollar bill and one five-dollar bill, in money of the United States of America," of the value of $15. This description designates bills circulating as money by authority of the general government, and ex vi termini the kind or species of currency,-national paper currency. It identifies the things stolen, and shows them to be subjects of larceny. The kind, denomination, and value are sufficiently averred. Sallie v. State, 39 Ala. 691; Grant v. State, 55 Ala. 201; Levy v. State, 79 Ala. 259. The description in the indictment being sufficient, whether a more particular description was to the grand jury unknown becomes an immaterial inquiry. Such an averment in an indictment,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ware v. State
...in describing the particular offense charged as to meet the requirements of good pleading. State v. Murphy, 6 Ala. 845; Carden v. State, 89 Ala. 130, 7 So. 801; v. State, 107 Ala. 133, 18 So. 206; McGehee v. State, 52 Ala. 224; Grant v. State, 55 Ala. 208; State v. Stedman, 7 Port. 495; Lod......
-
Scally v. Wardlaw
... ... but, it will be noted that not a single one of these ... witnesses testified to any chronic state of insanity, or ... permanent mental incapacity; they say that, in their opinion, ... Mrs. Leslie was not of sound mind at times, part of the time, ... ...
-
Levert v. State
...v. State, 120 Ala. 342, 349, 25 So. 182; Baldwin v. State, 204 Ala. 91, 85 So. 304; Gady v. State, 83 Ala. 51, 3 So. 429; Carden v. State, 89 Ala. 130, 7 So. 801; v. State, 63 Ala. 12. Defendant was duly arraigned and a special venire drawn, and all the preliminary requirements under the la......
-
Clark v. State
... ... description of the property is unknown is material, the point ... becomes an issue. See Enson v. State, 58 Fla. 37, 50 ... So. 948. But, where a sufficient description is given, an ... allegation that a better description is unknown is immaterial ... and may be regarded as surplusage. Carden v. State, ... 89 Ala. 130, 7 So. 801 ... In a ... prosecution for larceny, the indictment, for the purpose of ... giving individuality to the act charged, should, with ... reasonable certainty, state the species or names and the ... number of the articles or things alleged to have ... ...