Bell v. State

• Decision Date: 20 January 1904
• Parties: BELL v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

35 So. 1021

139 Ala. 124

BELL v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

January 20, 1904

Appeal from City Court of Montgomery; William H. Thomas, Judge.

Irvine Bell was convicted of embezzlement, and appeals. Affirmed.

The indictment under which the appellant in this case was tried and convicted was in words and figures as follows: "The grand jury of said county charge that, before the finding of this indictment, Irvine Bell, being the clerk, agent, or servant of W. M. Hudson & Co., a partnership composed of W. M. Hudson, L. Lasseter, and B. F. Yarbrough, did embezzle or fraudelently convert to his own use money to about the amount of fifty dollars, the personal property of the said W. M. Hudson & Co., a partnership as aforesaid, which said money had come into the possession of the said Irvine Bell by virtue of his employment as such clerk, agent, or servant, against the peace and dignity of the state of Alabama." To this indictment the defendant demurred upon the following grounds: "(1) It fails to aver that the defendant embezzled or fraudulently converted, etc., but charges that the defendant did embezzle or fraudulently convert, etc.; (2) it is indefinite and uncertain, in this: it uses the word 'fraudelently' instead of 'fraudulently.' " This demurrer was overruled, and the overruling of the demurrer presents the only question for consideration on this appeal.

Massey Wilson, Atty. Gen., for the State.

DOWDELL, J.

The defendant was indicted for embezzlement, under section 4660 of the Code of 1896. A demurrer was interposed to the indictment, and was overruled by the court. This action of the court is the only question presented for consideration. The first ground of the demurrer challenges the sufficiency of the indictment, in that it charges that the defendant "did embezzle or fraudulently convert," etc. The second ground challenges the sufficiency of the indictment because the word "fraudulently" is spelled "fraudelently." Both grounds are wholly without merit, and the trial court committed no error in its ruling.

Affirmed.