State v. Hopper
| Citation | 133 Ind. 460, 32 N.E. 878 |
| Case Date | December 20, 1892 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
133 Ind. 460
32 N.E. 878
STATE
v.
HOPPER.1
Supreme Court of Indiana.
Dec. 20, 1892.
Appeal from circuit court, Harrison county; W. T. Zenor, Judge.
Isaac J. Hopper was indicted for perjury. The indictment was quashed, and the state appeals. Reversed.
C. W. Cook, Pros. Atty., for the State. W. N. & R. J. Tracewell and Geo. W. Self, for appellee.
Coffey, J.
The appellee was indicted in the Harrison circuit court upon a charge of perjury. The court, upon motion of the appellee, quashed the indictment, and the state, by her prosecutor, excepted. Omitting the caption, the indictment in question is as follows: “The grand jurors for Harrison county, state of Indiana, upon their oaths present and charge that on the 7th day of April, 1890, at said county, a general election was held pursuant to law, and on that day such election was had and held in Blue River township, in said county, at the voting precinct in said township, for the purpose of electing township officers; that then and there one William Cephus Bray did unlawfully offer to vote, and said Bray was then and there duly challenged as unqualified to vote at said election by a qualified voter of said precinct and township; that thereupon said William Cephus Bray did insist upon voting, and, the said challenge not being withdrawn, the inspector of said election, one John A. Harrell, then and there administered to said Bray the usual and proper oath, as is required by law in such
[32 N.E. 879]
cases made and provided; that thereupon Isaac J. Hopper, a qualified voter of said precinct, a freeholder and householder thereof for one year then next preceding, for the purpose of enabling said William Cephus Bray then and there to vote, did then and there make oath and was solemnly sworn to an affidavit of the following tenor: ‘State of Indiana, ------ County-ss.: I, Isaac Hopper, do swear that I am a qualified voter of this precinct, and that I have been a freeholder and a resident householder of this precinct for one year next preceding this election, and that I know William Bray, who now desires to vote, has resided in this state for six months immediately preceding this election; that he has resided in this township sixty days and in this precinct thirty days, and is now a bona fide resident of this precinct. Isaac J. Hopper. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7th day of April, 1890. J. A. Harrell;’-that said J. A. Harrell was then and there John A. Harrell, who was then and there the inspector of said election; that said William Bray mentioned in said affidavit was and is the same William Cephus Bray who was challenged as aforesaid; that said William Cephus Bray did not then and there have the legal qualifications of a voter, in this, to wit, that he, the said William Cephus Bray was not then and there a resident of said township and precinct; that the said Isaac J. Hopper did then and there willfully, corruptly, and falsely and voluntarily make said affidavit before said John A. Harrell, inspector of said election, as aforesaid, in the manner and for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lane v. State
...intent. Meiers v. State, supra; McCool v. State, 23 Ind. 127, 129;State v. Jenkins, 120 Ind. 268, 269, 22 N. E. 133;State v. Hopper, 133 Ind. 460, 464, 32 N. E. 878; Gillett, Cr. Law (2d Ed.) § 125. Appellant insists, however, that the allegation “that appellant killed and murdered Thomas G......
-
Gullett v. State, No. 29024
...with the offense charged [233 Ind. 10] against an accused need not be stated in an affidavit or indictment. State v. Hopper, 1892, 133 Ind. 460, 32 N.E. 878; Joyce on Indictments, 2d Ed., § 438. But as a general rule the name of one injured in his person or property, by the act of the accus......
-
Evans v. State, No. 1-179A25
...connected with the offense charged against an accused need not be stated in an affidavit or indictment. State v. Hopper (1892), 133 Ind. 460, 32 N.E. 878; Joyce on Indictments, 2d Ed., § 438. But as a general rule the name of one injured in his person or property, by the act of the accused,......
-
Hall v. State, 22,152.
...motion to quash. The affidavit was sufficient to withstand the objections urged against it. Burns' Stat. 1908, § 2055; State v. Hopper, 133 Ind. 460, 32 N. E. 878; Gillett's Crim. Law, § 688. [6] Error is assigned on the action of the trial court in giving, and refusing to give, certain ins......
-
Lane v. State
...intent. Meiers v. State, supra; McCool v. State, 23 Ind. 127, 129;State v. Jenkins, 120 Ind. 268, 269, 22 N. E. 133;State v. Hopper, 133 Ind. 460, 464, 32 N. E. 878; Gillett, Cr. Law (2d Ed.) § 125. Appellant insists, however, that the allegation “that appellant killed and murdered Thomas G......
-
Gullett v. State, No. 29024
...with the offense charged [233 Ind. 10] against an accused need not be stated in an affidavit or indictment. State v. Hopper, 1892, 133 Ind. 460, 32 N.E. 878; Joyce on Indictments, 2d Ed., § 438. But as a general rule the name of one injured in his person or property, by the act of the accus......
-
Evans v. State, No. 1-179A25
...connected with the offense charged against an accused need not be stated in an affidavit or indictment. State v. Hopper (1892), 133 Ind. 460, 32 N.E. 878; Joyce on Indictments, 2d Ed., § 438. But as a general rule the name of one injured in his person or property, by the act of the accused,......
-
Hall v. State, No. 22,152.
...motion to quash. The affidavit was sufficient to withstand the objections urged against it. Burns' Stat. 1908, § 2055; State v. Hopper, 133 Ind. 460, 32 N. E. 878; Gillett's Crim. Law, § 688. [6] Error is assigned on the action of the trial court in giving, and refusing to give, certain ins......