State v. Hughes
| Decision Date | 21 November 1893 |
| Docket Number | 4981 |
| Citation | 56 N.W. 982,38 Neb. 366 |
| Parties | STATE OF NEBRASKA v. WILLIAM HUGHES |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
EXCEPTIONS to the decision of the district court for Gage county, APPELGET, J., presiding. Filed by leave of the supreme court under the provisions of section 515 of the Criminal Code.
EXCEPTIONS OVERRULED.
Alfred Hazlett, County Attorney, for the state.
A Hardy and Rickards & Prout, contra.
At the March term, 1891, of the district court of Gage county, the grand jury in and for said county returned into court an indictment charging the defendant with selling chattel mortgage property. The indictment, omitting the formal parts, alleges "that one William Hughes, late of the county aforesaid, on the 28th day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ninety, in the county of Gage and state of Nebraska, aforesaid, in due form of law did mortgage to W. J. Harris, Louis Werner, and Ebright the following personal property, to-wit: * * That afterwards, on, to-wit, the first day of September, 1890, in said county of Gage, and during the existence of the lien of said mortgage, said William Hughes, then and there being, unlawfully, fraudulently, and feloniously did sell, transfer, and dispose of a part of the said personal property described in said mortgage, to-wit, all of said oats and all of said millet; and the said William Hughes, then and there being, on, to-wit, the 15th day of November, 1890, in said county of Gage, and during the existence of the lien of said mortgage, did unlawfully, fraudulently, and feloniously sell, transfer, and dispose of a portion of said personal property, described in said mortgage, to-wit, about twenty-five bushels of corn, all of said sales, transfers, and disposals being without first procuring the consent of said W. J. Harris, Louis Werner, and Ebright, mortgagees, or either of said mortgagees; contrary to the form of the statute," etc.
On the trial the defendant, after the introduction of some testimony, objected to the reception of any further testimony in the case, on the ground that the indictment does not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime, which objection was sustained; and thereupon the court instructed the jury The jury returned a verdict of not guilty, and the defendant was discharged. The county attorney excepted to the decision of the district court, and he has brought the cause to this court under the provisions of section 515 of the Criminal Code, to settle the law.
This prosecution was brought under section 315 of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hunt v. State
...against whom fraud was perpetrated must, of course, be described in the indictment." In this connection, it does not appear that State v. Hughes, supra, is in any supported by State v. Ruhnke, supra. A search for authorities from other states discloses that in some jurisdictions it is neces......
-
Moline v. State
...must positively and explicitly state what the prisoner is called upon to answer.” Smith v. State, 21 Neb. 552, 32 N. W. 594;State v. Hughes, 38 Neb. 369, 56 N. W. 982;O'Connor v. State, 46 Neb. 160, 64 N. W. 719. Numerous other authorities may be cited,--as, for instance, People v. Logan, 1......
-
Moline v. State
... ... explicitly all that is essential to constitute the offense ... It can not be aided by intendments, but must positively and ... explicitly state what the prisoner is called upon to ... answer." Smith v. State, 21 Neb. 552, 556, 32 ... N.W. 594; State v. Hughes, 38 Neb. 366, 369, 56 N.W ... 982; O'Connor v. State, 46 Neb. 157, 64 N.W ... Numerous ... other authorities may be cited, as, for instance: People ... v. Logan, 1 Nev. 110; State v. La Bore, 26 Vt ... 765; Kearney v. State, 48 Md. 16; Allen v ... State, 13 Tex. Ct. App ... ...
-
Smith v. State
...charged explicitly. The allegation of intent cannot be aided by intendments. O'Connor v. State, 46 Neb. 157, 64 N.W. 719; State v. Hughes, 38 Neb. 366, 56 N.W. 982; Smith v. State, 21 Neb. 552, 32 N.W. 594. It however, the duty of the court to give the words used in the information the ordi......