71 Mich. 340 | Mich. | 1888
The respondent in this case was informed against for resisting a constable in the township ■of McMillan, on June 30, 1887, who was at the time
The following is a copy of the information in the case:
“ Sanford N. Dutcher, prosecuting attorney in and for' the county of Luce aforesaid, for and in behalf of the-people of the State of Michigan, comes into said court in the July term thereof, in the year 1887, and gives the court here to understand and be informed that Philip S. Hamilton, late of the township of McMillan, in the county aforesaid, heretofore, to wit, upon the 20th day of June, A. D. 1887, at the township of McMillan, in the county of Luce, aforesaid, did knowingly ■ and willfully obstruct, resist, and oppose a certain constable of the township of McMillan, and of the county aforesaid, to wit, William T. Crocker, a person authorized by law to maintain and preserve the peace, in his lawful act, attempt, and effort to maintain, preserve, and keep the peace, against the form of the statutes in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the people of the State of Michigan."
When the cause was called for trial, counsel for defendant objected to the sufficiency of the information, and asked that it be quashed for the reason it contained no statement of any offense. The court refused this request,, and counsel excepted to thp ruling.
The prosecution called as a witness William T. Crocker. Defendant’s counsel then objected—
“ To the introduction of any testimony under the information for the following reasons:
“1. The information charges no offense known to the law.
“2. The'information contains no allegation of any breach of the peace.
“3. The information contains no statement of facts-constituting any specific offense."
The court overruled the objection, and defendant’s counsel excepted.
The conviction in this case must be set aside; and, as the information charges no crime against the respondent, he must be discharged.