Clemm v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Clemm v. State

45 So. 212, 154 Ala. 12, 1907 Ala. LEXIS 656

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedDecember 19, 1907

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 45 So. 212 (Clemm v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clemm v. State, 45 So. 212, 154 Ala. 12, 1907 Ala. LEXIS 656 (Ala. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

TYSON, C. J.

-The rule is well established that, when articles of property belonging to different owners are stolen at the same time and place, the offense is sin[14]*14gle and must be charged in the same count. — State v. Dalton (Miss.) 44 South. 802, and authorities there cited] 22 Cyc. 383 and note. But to come within this rule the averments of the count should affirmatively. show that the property of the different owners was stolen at the same time and place. Good pleading requires this, in order to exclude the intendment, which must be indulged on demurrer, to avoid the objection so taken, that two distinct larcenies were committed. The .averment of the indictment in this case was faulty in that respect, and the demurrer to it should have been sustained.

Reversed and remanded.

Haralson, Simpson, and Denson, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

TYSON, C. J.

-The rule is well established that, when articles of property belonging to different owners are stolen at the same time and place, the offense is sin[14]*14gle and must be charged in the same count. — State v. Dalton (Miss.) 44 South. 802, and authorities there cited] 22 Cyc. 383 and note. But to come within this rule the averments of the count should affirmatively. show that the property of the different owners was stolen at the same time and place. Good pleading requires this, in order to exclude the intendment, which must be indulged on demurrer, to avoid the objection so taken, that two distinct larcenies were committed. The .averment of the indictment in this case was faulty in that respect, and the demurrer to it should have been sustained.

Reversed and remanded.

Haralson, Simpson, and Denson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 So. 212, 154 Ala. 12, 1907 Ala. LEXIS 656, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clemm-v-state-ala-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack