Kinningham v. State

Jun 8, 1889
No. 14,910
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Elliott
Elliott, C. J. —

Several objections are urged against the indictment upon which the appellant ‍​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‍was convicted, but we deem it necessary to notice only one of them. The indictment charges in general terms that the defendant did “unlawfully, feloniously and ‍​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‍wilfully attempt to set fire to and burn and destroy a certain frame building, commonly called a barn.-’-’ No act is charged, and the indictment is radically ‍​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‍bad. The charge that the defendant did attempt to do a designated thing is really little more than an averment that he intended to do the thing, ‍​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‍and to constitute crime there must be both an act and a guilty intention. Where it is sought to charge an accused with a crime, the ‍​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‍acts done by him must be stated. 1 Bishop Crim. Law, section 659.

Judgment reversed.