Coverdale v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Coverdale v. State

60 Ind. 306

DecidedMay 15, 1878

StatusPublished

This text of 60 Ind. 306 (Coverdale v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Coverdale v. State, 60 Ind. 306 (Ind. 1878).

Pincite

Opinion

Biddle, J.

Indictment against the appellant for unlawfully selling intoxicating liquor.

[307]*307Motion to quasli overruled; exceptions; trial; conviction ; appeal.

The appellant insists, that the indictment is bad because it shows upon its face, that the grand jury was “sworn or affirmed.”

. ■ As the record is presented to us, this obj ection, if it could be called an objection, does not exist in point of fact. The words “or affirmed” were written in the record, but appear to have been struck out by the pen.

We must hold the transcript to be correct as it appears. The judgment is affirmed, at the costs of the appellant.

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

Biddle, J.

Indictment against the appellant for unlawfully selling intoxicating liquor.

[307]*307Motion to quasli overruled; exceptions; trial; conviction ; appeal.

The appellant insists, that the indictment is bad because it shows upon its face, that the grand jury was “sworn or affirmed.”

. ■ As the record is presented to us, this obj ection, if it could be called an objection, does not exist in point of fact. The words “or affirmed” were written in the record, but appear to have been struck out by the pen.

We must hold the transcript to be correct as it appears. The judgment is affirmed, at the costs of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 Ind. 306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coverdale-v-state-ind-1878.