Forman v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 29 September 1922 |
| Citation | 195 Ky. 758 |
| Parties | Forman v. Commonwealth. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Fleming Circuit Court.
M. J. HENNESSEY for appellant.
CHAS. I. DAWSON, Attorney General, and THOS. B. McGREGOR, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Ernest Forman was convicted in the Fleming circuit court and given a sentence of thirty days in jail and a fine of three hundred dollars under the following indictment:
"The Commonwealth of Kentucky against Ernest Forman, alias Ernest Crawford, G. H. Hitt and L. T. Thackson, of the offense or crime of violating prohibition law, committed as follows, viz.: `The said Ernest Forman, alias Ernest Crawford, G. H. Hitt and L. T. Thackson on the __ day of __, 1921, and other days before and since, within twelve months past, and before the finding of this indictment, in the county aforesaid, did unlawfully have in possession, keep and transport for the purposes of sale, certain spirituous, vinous, malt and intoxicating liquor, to-wit, white or moonshine whiskey, to be used as a beverage and not for sacramental, scientific, medicinal or mechanical purposes contrary to law and against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.'"
While a demurrer to the indictment was pending, the Commonwealth attorney voluntarily elected to try the accused on the charge of having intoxicating liquor in his possession for sale in violation of the statutes. The demurrer was overruled, to which the defendant excepted, and, being compelled to proceed to trial, at the conclusion of the Commonwealth's evidence and again at the conclusion of all the evidence he moved the court to instruct the jury to return a verdict of acquittal. These motions were overruled, but in the motion and grounds for a new trial the defendant again attacked the validity of the indictment.
On this appeal several questions are presented for decision, but we deem it necessary to consider only one, which is, whether or not such an offense is alleged in the indictment as will support the judgment of conviction.
It will be noted that the form of the attempted indictment is unusual, since there is no specific accusation against appellant, further than the charge in the descriptive (not the accusative) part that he, with others, did unlawfully have in his possession, keep and transport for the purpose of sale, certain spirituous, vinous, malt and intoxicating liquor, to-wit, white or moonshine whiskey, to be used as a beverage and not for sacramental, scientific, medicinal or mechanical purposes, etc. The usual accusative form is absent, and in lieu thereof appears "The Commonwealth of Kentucky against Ernest Forman," etc., "of the offense or crime of violating prohibition law committed as follows, viz.:" after which is the descriptive part of the offense. Appellant is not charged with...
To continue reading
Request your trial