Hogan v. State
| Citation | 28 So. 763,42 Fla. 562 |
| Parties | HOGAN et al. v. STATE. |
| Decision Date | 25 July 1900 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
Error to criminal court of record, Duval county; John L. Doggett Judge.
Archibald Hogan and William Hogan were convicted of an assault with intent to kill, and bring error. Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
1. A motion in arrest of judgment should be granted when the verdict finds an accused person guilty of an offense not charged, or included in the charge made, in the indictment.
2. The gist of the offense denounced by section 2403, Rev. St., is the intent with which the assault is committed, and an information drawn under that section must charge such intent with that certainty which is required as to other material allegations. It must not be left to uncertain inference. Nor is a mere statement of such intent in the conclusion of the information, by way of legal deduction or inference from facts previously alleged, a sufficient allegation as to the intent.
3. An information alleging that L. H., A. H., and W. H., in Duval county, Fla., on December 20, 1899, 'in and upon one J M. W., with certain deadly weapons, to wit, pistols, which they, the said L. H., A. H., and W. H., then and there held in their hands, an assault did make, and him, the said J. M W., did then and there beat, bruise, wound, and ill treat they, the said L. H., A. H., and W. H., then and there having a premeditated design and intent then and there unlawfully to kill and murder him, the said J. M. W., whereby, by force of the statute in such cases made and provided, the said L. H., A. H., and W. H. are deemed to have committed the crime of assault with intent to murder, contrary,' etc., does not charge an offense under section 2403, Rev. St.
Clark & Gibbons and Geo. U. Walker, for plaintiffs in error.
William B. Lamar, Atty. Gen., for the State.
On December 22, 1899, an information was filed in the criminal court of record of Duval county charging 'that Louis Hogan, Archibald Hogan, and William Hogan, late of the county of Duval and state of Florida, on the 20th day of December in the year of our Lord 1899, in the county and state aforesaid, in and upon one James M. Williams, with certain deadly weapons, to wit, pistols, which they, the said Louis Hogan, Archibald Hogan, and William Hogan, then and there held in their hands, an assault did make, and him, the said James M. Williams, did then and there beat, bruise, wound, and ill treat, they, the said Louis Hogan, Archibald Hogan, and William Hogan, then and there having a premeditated design and intent then and there unlawfully to kill and murder him, the said James M. Williams, wherefore, by virtue of the statute in such case made and provided, the said Louis Hogan, Archibald Hogan, and William Hogan are deemed to have committed the crime of assault with intent to murder, contrary,' etc.
On January 9, 1900, upon motion of the state the court granted a severance as to Louis Hogan, and, the other defendants having been arraigned and pleaded not guilty, a trial was had as to them, resulting in a verdict as follows: 'We, the jury, find the defendants guilty of assault with intent to murder in the second degree.' The defendants thereupon moved in arrest of judgment upon the following grounds, among others:
(1) The information is not sufficient to base a sentence on the verdict rendered.
(2) No sentence or judgment can legally be imposed on the verdict of the jury.
This motion was overruled, and the ruling is assigned as error. The court sentenced the defendants to imprisonment in the state's prison at hard labor,--Archibald Hogan for the period of six years, and William Hogan for the period of four years. From these sentences the defendants sued out this writ of error. Various other rulings in the case are assigned as error, but, in view of our conclusions as to the ruling upon the motion in arrest of judgment, it is neither necessary nor proper for us to express an opinion as to them.
It is quite evident that the trial was had upon the theory that the information charged an offense under section 2403, Rev. St which reads as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vogel v. State
...or included in the charge made in the information or indictment, the motion in arrest of judgment should be granted. Hogan v. State, 42 Fla. 562, 28 So. 763. attack having been made upon the verdict by a motion in arrest of judgment but only through the medium of a motion for a new trial, w......
-
Barber v. State
...intent to commit a felony, and that the intent existed at the time of the assault, thereby distinguishing this case from Hogan v. State, 42 Fla. 562, 28 So. 763; Ruis State, 43 Fla. 186, 30 So. 802. See Anderson v. State, supra; Brinkley v. State, supra; Gray v. State, supra. See, as to the......
-
Harris v. State
...Crim. Proc. § 1285; Clark's Crim. Proc. §§ 186, 485; Jordan v. State, 22 Fla. 528; Long v. State, 42 Fla. 612, 28 So. 855; Hogan v. State, 42 Fla. 562, 28 So. 763; O'Connell v. State, 55 Ga. The verdict of the jury in this case is not responsive to the charge and not consistent therewith, a......
-
Myers v. State
...State, 55 Ga. 191; Dreyer v. State, 11 Tex.App. 631; State v. Burdon, 38 La. Ann. 357; Miller v. People, 25 Hun (N. Y.) 473; Hogan v. State, 42 Fla. 562, 28 So. 763. The erred when it refused to arrest the judgment. Where the arrest of judgment is because the verdict is a nullity, or so def......