Opinion op the Court by
Reversing and remanding.
Appellant was convicted of the offense denounced *486 by KRS 433.250(4), stealing chickens of the value of $2 or more. In brief for appellant it is only contended that the indictment failed to contain the charge that the stealing was against the will or without the consent of the owner, and that the instruction failed likewise to incorporate the words.. Reversal is asked on this ground alone.
In Hudspeth v. Com.,
We followed the Hudspeth case in Nelson v. Com.,
It follows that the judgment must be reversed for proceedings consistent with this opinion, or such action as may appear proper to the court and its officers.
