State v. Clark

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Clark

23 La. Ann. 194

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedMarch 15, 1871

DocketNo. 3197

StatusPublished

This text of 23 La. Ann. 194 (State v. Clark) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Clark, 23 La. Ann. 194 (La. 1871).

Pincite

Opinion

Howe, J.

The defendant, having been indicted and tried for murder, found guilty without capital punishment and sentenced to hard labor for life, has appealed. There are no bill's of exceptions in the-record, nor any assignment of error. There appears to have been a. motion filed in arrest of judgment. What disposition was made of it,, does not distinctly appear and perhaps in strictness it might be deemed to have been abandoned. However, granting that it was urged and overruled, we see no error in the judgment. The motion was founded on the allegation that the prisoner was not served with a» [195]*195true copy of tlie venire and indictment. This was no ground for a motion in arrest.' 8 Bob. 513. The record shows that the prisoner was duly served with copy of indictment and venire and does not show that he made any complaint in such form that we can pass upon it, until.after conviction. 6 An. 690; 12 An. 679; 14 An. 667. Judgment affirmed.

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

Howe, J.

The defendant, having been indicted and tried for murder, found guilty without capital punishment and sentenced to hard labor for life, has appealed. There are no bill's of exceptions in the-record, nor any assignment of error. There appears to have been a. motion filed in arrest of judgment. What disposition was made of it,, does not distinctly appear and perhaps in strictness it might be deemed to have been abandoned. However, granting that it was urged and overruled, we see no error in the judgment. The motion was founded on the allegation that the prisoner was not served with a» [195]*195true copy of tlie venire and indictment. This was no ground for a motion in arrest.' 8 Bob. 513. The record shows that the prisoner was duly served with copy of indictment and venire and does not show that he made any complaint in such form that we can pass upon it, until.after conviction. 6 An. 690; 12 An. 679; 14 An. 667. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 La. Ann. 194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-clark-la-1871.