State v. McMickle
| Court | Supreme Court of Texas |
| Citation | 34 Tex. 676 |
| Parties | THE STATE v. M. L. MCMICKLE. |
| Decision Date | 01 January 1870 |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Indictment charged that defendant, “on or about” a certain date, committed an aggravated assault upon “one Claiborne, whose name to the grand jurors aforesaid is unknown.” Held, that the time was well laid, and the person assaulted sufficiently described.
APPEAL from Erath. Tried below before the Hon. A. B. Norton. The head note indicates the facts.
Wm. Alexander, Attorney General, for the state.
No brief for the appellee.
The judgment of the district court in this case must be reversed on the authority of The State of Texas v. Sam. Elliot, decided at this term of the court. The time when the assault was alleged to have been committed was set forth in the indictment with sufficient definiteness to have put the defendant upon his trial, and the court erred in sustaining the exceptions to the indictment. The other ground of exception to the indictment is also untenable, and should have been overruled. The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
Reversed and remanded
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Woolsey
...v. State, 45 Ind. 371; Hardibeck v. State, 10 Ind. 459; Hampton v. State, 8 Ind. 337; Coakley v. State, 4 Iowa 474; State v. Mc Nichol, 34 Tex. 676; State v. Hill, 34 Tex. 623; State v. Elliott, 34 Tex. 148; Fish v. Manning, 31 F. 340. Mr. Bishop, in his work on Criminal Procedure, in discu......
-
Benson v. State, 17109.
...laid down the rule that it was sufficient to allege that the crime was committed "on or about" a certain date. State v. McMickle, 34 Tex. 676; State v. Elliot, 34 Tex. 148; State v. Hill, 35 Tex. 348, 349; Johnson v. State, 1 Tex. App. 118. Without exception, as far as we know, the rule has......