State v. Parm & Viney

60 A. 977, 21 Del. 556, 5 Penne. 556, 1905 Del. LEXIS 57
New York Court of General Session of the Peace·Decided February 9, 1905·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Lore, C. J.:

—The Court have thoroughly looked into the matter of the motion made this morning to quash the third count • of the indictment against John Farm and John Viney, and we think the word “person ” means other than the woman to be operated upon for the purprse of producing an abortion; that the person advising or counseling, or whatever it may be, the woman herself, is provided for in the earlier part of section 2; that the word counsel ” does not apply to persons giving her advice; and that therefore this count is bad, and ought to be, and is quashed and stricken out.

Nolle prosequi entered.

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

State v. Parm & Viney, 60 A. 977, 21 Del. 556, 5 Penne. 556, 1905 Del. LEXIS 57 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1905).

60 A. 977 (State v. Parm & Viney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Scott v. State
113 A.2d 880 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 1955)
State v. Henry
105 A. 849 (New York Court of General Session of the Peace, 1918)