Richards v. State
This text of 76 Miss. 268 (Richards v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
Strawhern’s case, 37( Miss., 422, is cited to show that the indictment in this case is not a joint indictment. It is true the [270]*270court, arguendo, say that the indictment there was not joint, because of the omission of the words £ £ with ” or £ £ together with.” But the indictment in Ball v. State, 67 Miss., 358, omitted these words, and was properly held to be a joint .indictment. See the last sentence in the opinion. This is the true rule. 1 Bish. New Grim. Proced., sec. 471, and authorities, where Mr. Bishop states it to be the common practice to omit these words and simply charge that the parties did the act constituting the offense. The demurrer was properly overruled.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
76 Miss. 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richards-v-state-miss-1898.