State v. Goodwin
| Decision Date | 20 March 1958 |
| Citation | 139 A.2d 630,101 N.H. 252 |
| Parties | STATE v. Sherman A. GOODWIN. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Louis C. Wyman, Atty. Gen., and John J. Zimmerman, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Fisher, Parsons & Moran, Dover (Harold D. Moran, Dover), for defendant.
RSA 580:30 provides, 'If any person, being the duly appointed or acting administrator of the estate or executor of the last will of a person deceased, or guardian of any minor or insane person, or trustee, or other person acting in any fiduciary capacity, shall embezzle or fraudulently convert to his own use, or fraudulently secrete with intent so to do, any money, bill, note or security for money, evidence of debt or other effects or property whatever, in his possession as administrator, executor, guardian, trustee, or in any other fiduciary capacity as aforesaid, he shall be fined * * *.'
'In indictments for offenses created by statute, it is, in general, sufficient to describe the offense in the words of the statute, and if, * * * a defendant insists upon the insufficiency of such an indictment, it devolves upon him to show that, from the obvious intention of the legislature, or the known principles of law, the case falls within some exception to such general rule.' State v. Abbott, 31 N.H. 434, 438, 439. But an indictment so drawn does not always meet the constitutional requirements that a fair and full description of the offense charged must be alleged. State v. Gilbert, 89 N.H. 134, 194 A. 728; 42 C.J.S. Indictments and Informations § 139c, p. 1039.
Our court has declared on many occasions, that an indictment is sufficient if it informs the defendant of the nature and cause of the action with sufficient definiteness so he can prepare for trial. State v. Clapp, 94 N.H. 62, 46 A.2d 119; State v Langeher, 95 N.H. 97, 58 A.2d 315; State v. Ellard, 95 N.H. 217, 60 A.2d 461; State v. Story, 97 N.H. 141, 83 A.2d 142. Gradually the courts came to realize that much of 'the tautology and prolixity' which characterized indictments at early common law could safely be disregarded without impinging upon the constitutional rights of the defendant. 4 Wharton, Criminal Procedure, s. 1758; 24 Harv.L.Rev. 290, 294. The salutary progress made by modern courts in dispensing with many of the technicalities and prolixities which characterized indictments at early common law does not, however, dispense with the requirement that an indictment shall fully state all of the essential elements of the offense charged.
The statute (RSA 580:30) after defining the fiduciaries embraced within its scope also includes anyone acting '* * * in any other fiduciary capacity as aforesaid * * *.' The specific fiduciary capacity in which the defendant acted is not defined in the indictment other than the averment that the funds...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cyr v. Sanborn
... ... Davis v. State, 94 N.H. 321, 323, 52 A.2d 793. The extent to which rules of law shall be given specific application to the claims of the parties and the facts ... ...
-
State v. Charest, 5741
...definiteness so he could prepare for trial. State v. Charette, 98 N.H. 477, 478, 103 A.2d 192, 43 A.L.R.2d 827; State v. Goodwin, 101 N.H. 252, 253, 139 A.2d 630. The Trial Court could properly find the following facts on the evidence: Aime LaPlante, at about noon on June 9, 1966, came home......
-
State v. Bussiere, s. 78-089
...bar to further prosecution for the same offense . . . ." 41 Am.Jur.2d Indictments and Informations § 93 (1968), Citing State v. Goodwin, 101 N.H. 252, 139 A.2d 630 (1958). We therefore quash the two RSA 632-A:2 (Supp.1977) indictments entered against defendant Bussiere. See Attorney General......
-
State v. Webster
...all of the essential elements of the offense charged' with sufficient definiteness so that he can prepare for trial. State v. Goodwin, 101 N.H. 252, 254, 139 A.2d 630, 632. The defendant here is charged disjunctively with 'knowing that injury had been caused by him to a person or to propert......