History
  • No items yet
midpage
Oliver v. Commonwealth
95 Ky. 372
Ky. Ct. App.
1894
Check Treatment
CHIEF-JUSTICE BENNETT

delivered the opinion of the court.

The appellant was -indicted, tried and convicted of the statutory crime of cutting and sawing off the brands of saw-logs. The indictment was signed by the foreman of the grand jury and returned into court and received by it. Rut it was not indorsed “ a true bill.”

Section 119 of the Criminal Code provides that the “ concurrence of twelve grand jurors is required to find *373an indictment; when so found, it must be indorsed‘a true bill/ and the indorsement signed by the foreman.”

The provision of the Code supra i<s mandatory, not merely directory, that the indictment shall he “ indorsed a true hill and signed by the foreman,” which indorsement is the only legal and competent evidence that the paper filed is an indictment legally found; and unless it is so indorsed the paper is not an indictment legally returned into court and which the accused is not hound to answer. It is not a valid indictment, and it should have been dismissed upon demurrer.

The case is reversed, with directions to dismiss the indictment.

Case Details

Case Name: Oliver v. Commonwealth
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Date Published: Mar 10, 1894
Citation: 95 Ky. 372
Court Abbreviation: Ky. Ct. App.
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.