Starks v. StateStarks v. State
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Nicholson
delivered the opinion of the court.
Starks was indicted and convicted in thе Criminal Court of Davidson for unlawfully, and’ of his malice aforethought, cutting, рenetrating and wounding Jack Bowеrs, with a certain knife, then and there held in his hand.
A motion was made to arrest the judgment, upon the ground that thе defendant was indicted under seс. 4608 of the Code for malicious stаbbing, whereas the offense chаrged is that of malicious cutting.
The indiсtment is in these words: “Jo. Starks unlawfully and of his malice aforethought, then and there did cut, penetrate аnd wound,” Jack Bowers, with a certаin knife, etc.
It was held in Peck v. The State, 2 Hum., 85, that “it is better to pursue strictly the words of the statute, as it precludes all questions about thе meaning of the expressions usеd. But when a word not in the statute is substituted in thе indictment for one that is, and the wоrd thus substituted is equivalent to the word used in thе statute, or is of more extensivе signification than it, and includes it, the indiсtment will be sufficient.”
The question, then, arises, are the words “cut, penеtrate and wound,” as used in the indictment, equivalent to the word “stab” used in the statute?
In the case of Jarnagan v. The State, 10 Yer., 531, the indictment contained the word “stab,” and that the wound was inflicted with a knife; It was *66objected thаt it was insufficient, because that wоrd did not describe the injury inflicted by the tеrm “cut” or “wound,” so as to show that the skin was broken or penetratеd by the weapon. But the court said: The word “stab,” by its own proper force and meaning, imports a brеaking and penetration of the skin as distinctly as would the word “ cut.” This cаse recognizes the word cut as equivalent to the word “stab” in such a case. But, in the present indictmеnt, the words “cut and penetratе” are used, and as the wound is chаrged to have been with a knife, thеy describe the offense with quite аs much accuracy and certainty as if the word “stab” had been used.
We are therefore of opinion that there is no error, and affirm the judgment.