Commonwealth v. Vanmeter

8 Ky. Op. 754, 1876 Ky. LEXIS 236
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedOctober 4, 1876
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 8 Ky. Op. 754 (Commonwealth v. Vanmeter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Commonwealth v. Vanmeter, 8 Ky. Op. 754, 1876 Ky. LEXIS 236 (Ky. Ct. App. 1876).

Opinion

Opinion by

Judge Cofer :

The warrant in this case is in substantial conformity to the requirements of Secs. 24 and 321 of the Criminal Code, and the court erred in quashing it. If it had not been originally sufficient the amendment proposed should have been allowed. The amendment would not have changed the character of the prosecution, nor would it have infringed the rule that the case tried in the circuit court, on appeal, must be the same case which was tried in the inferior court.

An indictment can only be found and presented by a grand jury, and therefore no amendment of an indictment can be allowed. But a warrant which issues upon information may be amended in the same manner as a warrant in a civil case. Judgment reversed and cause remanded, with directions to overrule the motion to quash the warrant.

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

Related

Hoskins v. Maricle
150 S.W.3d 1 (Kentucky Supreme Court, 2004)
Bullion v. Commonwealth
268 S.W. 1103 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 Ky. Op. 754, 1876 Ky. LEXIS 236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-vanmeter-kyctapp-1876.