Newcome v. State

Nov 15, 1866
Reporters:
Before:
Erazer
Erazer, J.

1. That ho affidavit against the defendant is filed with the information in a criminal case, is ‍​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‍an objection which can only be reached by a motion below. It cannot be first made in this court.

2. An information alleging “that T. ET. is now confined in tbe jail of Orange county, Indiana, on a charge of ‍​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‍grand larceny, tbe identical felony hereinafter set forth, and that he has not been indicted by any grand jury of said county for said crime; and that at tbe said county of Orange, on,” &c., u tbe said T. N. ‍​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‍did feloniously steal, &c., one bay mare, *11of the value of |150, the personal property of one O. T.,” sufficiently charges the larceny, and shows the jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas. In Flinn v. The State, 24 Ind. ‍​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‍286, the offense for which the defendant was imprisoned was very particularly described, but there was no averment that-he was guilty of that, or of any offense.

,7. II. Stotsenburg and T. M. Browne, for appellant. ‘D. F. Williamson, Attorney General, for ‍​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‍the State.

The foregoing propositions dispose of all the questions made in this ease.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.