State v. Rollins

Indiana Supreme Court

State v. Rollins

28 Ind. 390

DecidedNovember 15, 1867

StatusPublished

This text of 28 Ind. 390 (State v. Rollins) 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.

Bluebook

State v. Rollins, 28 Ind. 390 (Ind. 1867).

Pincite

Opinion

Ray, J.

— This was an indictment for grand larceny. The [391]*391chattel which was the subject of the theft was alleged to be the property “ of the overseers of the poor in said county of Knox, for the use of the poor then and there being found.” A motion to quash was sustained. There was no error. The overseer of the poor is the township trustee., 1 G. & H., § 7, p. 638. If it was intended to aver that the property belonged to that individual, in his own right, the name of the persbn should have been given. In his official capacity he could not hold the property, as overseer of the poor. The law imposes upon each county the duty to relieve and support all poor and indigent persons lawfully settled therein, and provides the method of raising money for that purpose. Id., § 4, p. 494. The personal goods that may be purchased for the benefit of the persons described become the property of the county.

D. E. Williamson, Attorney General, for the State.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Ray, J.

— This was an indictment for grand larceny. The [391]*391chattel which was the subject of the theft was alleged to be the property “ of the overseers of the poor in said county of Knox, for the use of the poor then and there being found.” A motion to quash was sustained. There was no error. The overseer of the poor is the township trustee., 1 G. & H., § 7, p. 638. If it was intended to aver that the property belonged to that individual, in his own right, the name of the persbn should have been given. In his official capacity he could not hold the property, as overseer of the poor. The law imposes upon each county the duty to relieve and support all poor and indigent persons lawfully settled therein, and provides the method of raising money for that purpose. Id., § 4, p. 494. The personal goods that may be purchased for the benefit of the persons described become the property of the county.

D. E. Williamson, Attorney General, for the State.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 Ind. 390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-rollins-ind-1867.