History
  • No items yet
midpage
Buffington v. State
52 S.E. 19
Ga.
1905
Check Treatment
Fish, C. J.

1. It is essential to the validity of an indictment for larceny that the ownership of the property, if known, be laid in some person or persons.

2. If the indictment lays the ownership of the goods alleged to have been stolen in a partnership, without alleging the names of the partners composing the firm, it is fatally defective. . 12 Enc. PL & Pr. 967; Clark’s Crim. Proc. 228; People v. Bogart, 36 Cal. 245. See Mattox v. State, 115 Ga. 219.

3. The name “Stewart & Reece” imports a partnership; and therefore an indictment for larceny wherein the ownership of the goods alleged to have been stolen was laid in “one Stewart & Reece,” without more, should have been held bad, on special demurrer directed to this defect therein.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Buffington v. State
Court Name: Supreme Court of Georgia
Date Published: Nov 8, 1905
Citation: 52 S.E. 19
Court Abbreviation: Ga.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.