State v. Hunter
| Decision Date | 01 July 1890 |
| Docket Number | 1355 |
| Citation | 8 So. 583,42 La.Ann. 814 |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
| Parties | THE STATE OF LOUISIANA v. THOMAS HUNTER |
APPEAL from the Twenty-sixth District Court, Parish of St. John the Baptist. Rost, J.
Gervais Leche, District Attorney, J. A. Gaudet and J. N. Ogden, for the State, Appellee.
Chas A. Baquie, for Defendant and Appellant.
The defendant was indicted, tried and convicted under Sec. 795 of the Revised Statutes, Act No. 24 of 1882.
He filed a motion in arrest of judgment as follows: "That the intent to commit, which is the essence of the offence charged, is not laid as having been wilful, felonious and with malice aforethought as required by law."
The indictment charges the offence as follows: "That one Thomas Hunter, late of the parish of St. John the Baptist, on or about the 23d day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ninety, with force and arms, in the parish of St. John the Baptist aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction of the Twenty-Sixth Judicial District Court of Louisiana, in and for the parish of St. John the Baptist aforesaid, did feloniously, wilfully and of malice aforethought, whilst lying in wait with a dangerous weapon to-wit, a shot gun, wilfully shoot one Alexander Davant, with the felonious intent then and there and thereby to kill and murder him, the said Alexander Davant, contrary to the form of the statute of the State of Louisiana, in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State."
This charge and description of the offence in the indictment is amply sufficient. State vs. Humphries, 35 An. 966.
The accused contends that, after the description of the offence in the first part of the charge, it is qualified and restricted after the description of the weapon used, to a wilful and felonious intent, omitting the words with malice aforethought. These words -- wilful and felonious -- could with propriety have been omitted from that portion of the indictment. It was unnecessary to use them and they are mere surplusage. Omitted from the indictment, the charge will read: * * * "did feloniously, wilfully, and of malice aforethought, whilst lying in wait with a dangerous weapon, to-wit, a shot gun, shoot one Alexander Davant, with the intent then and there and thereby to kill and murder him, the said Alexander Davant," etc. This charge is identical with that in the case of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. High
... ... aforethought, etc., it should have said that the shooting was ... of that character. The argument by which that contention is ... sought to be supported is founded upon a [116 La. 90] ... comparison and combination of the cases of State v ... Marshall, 37 La.Ann. 26; State v. Hunter, 42 ... La.Ann. 814, 8 So. 583; and State v. Scott, 38 ... La.Ann. 387. It is pretty, but of no force, and a ... reproduction of it here would be a useless consumption of ... time. The rule in cases like the present one is stated, in ... Bishop, Crim. Pro. vol. 2, § 77, as follows: ... ...
-
State v. Menard
... ... 99; State v ... Scott, 38 La.Ann. 387; and State v. Johnson, 51 ... La.Ann. 1647, 26 So. 437. There are other decisions in which ... the doctrine seems to have been implied, viz.: State v ... Bradford, 33 La.Ann. 921; State v. Williams, 37 ... La.Ann. 776; and State v. Hunter, 42 La.Ann. 814, 8 ... So. 583. But this court has also held, in five cases, one of ... which was decided only recently, that in an indictment for ... shooting, stabbing, cutting, or thrusting with a dangerous ... weapon with intent to commit murder, it is only necessary to ... follow ... ...
- Provost v. Morgan's Louisiana & Texas Railroad Co.
-
Rareshide v. Enterprise Ginning Co.
... ... District Judge rescinded the order granted in the following ... ex parte order: ... "The ... Supreme Court of this State having decided in a final ... judgment in the suit between the same parties, being the case ... of D. T. Weil vs. Enterprise Ginning and ... ...