Ryan v. State
This text of 52 Ind. 167 (Ryan 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.
Opinion
— Indictment for assault and battery. The ■charging part of the indictment is this:
“ Did then and there, at the county of Martin, in the State of Indiana, in a rude, insolent and angry manner, unlawfully touch, beat, bruise and strike one William N. Wag-goner; and did, then and there * * * * unlawfully .shoot, strike and wound him, the said William N. Waggoner, with a gun loaded with powder and leaden shots, which,” etc.
The evidence shows that the battery was committed with a stone, and not with a gun, as alleged in the indictment; and the only question in the case is, does the evidence warrant a conviction on the indictment?
There is no necessity, in an indictment for an assault and battery, to describe the instrument with which the battery was committed; but if this is done, it is sufficient to prove that it was done with a different instrument, and this will not be a variance. 2 Bishop Crim. Proced., sec. 514; 1 Greenl. Ev., sec. 65.
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
52 Ind. 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ryan-v-state-ind-1875.