State v. Murphy

34 N.E. 248, 7 Ind. App. 44, 1893 Ind. App. LEXIS 212
Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided May 26, 1893·No. No. 958·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Lotz, J.

The appellee was indicted for a violation of section 1941, R. S. 1881. The first count charged that the defendant being about to enter unlawfully upon the enclosed land of George Stephenson, and being forbidden so to do by the owner, did thereafter unlawfully enter upon the same. The second count charges that the defendant, being upon the land of George Stephenson, and being notified by the owner to depart therefrom, unlawfully neglected and refused so to do. The court below 'sustained a motion to quash.

The only point made against the indictment is that it fails to describe the lands specifically.

This is unnecessary in such an indictment. State v. Smith, 34, N. E. Rep. 127.

Judgment reversed, with instruction to overrule motion to quash.

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

State v. Murphy, 34 N.E. 248, 7 Ind. App. 44, 1893 Ind. App. LEXIS 212 (Ind. Ct. App. 1893).

34 N.E. 248 (State v. Murphy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. v. Buell (Slip Opinion)
2015 Ohio 4551 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2015)
Wachendorf v. Shaver
78 N.E.2d 370 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1948)
Geauga Lake Improvement Ass'n v. Lozier
182 N.E. 489 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1932)
State v. Anderson
98 N.E. 289 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1912)
Bach v. Goff
34 Ohio C.C. Dec. 766 (Cuyahoga Circuit Court, 1904)
State v. Young
52 N.E. 760 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1899)