State v. Wilson
This text of 67 So. 26 (State v. Wilson) 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.
Opinions
Defendants were charged with assaulting one Charles Zenor, and by putting the said Zenor in fear, did unlawfully, willfully, feloniously, forcibly, and violently rob, take, steal, and carry away $13, the property of said Zenor.
Defendants moved to arrest the judgment on the ground that the indictment is fatally defective on its face, in that it does not contain the allegation “against the will” of the person said to have been robbed; and, further, because the indictment does not contain the allegation that the money was robbed “from the person” of the said Charles Zenor.
It was unnecessary to charge that the robbery was committed “against the will” of Charles Zenor; for the reason that the indictment charges that the defendants put said Zenor “in fear,” and unlawfully, feloniously, willfully, forcibly, and violently robbed him of $13.
After thus charging defendants, it would have been tautological to have added the phrase “against his will.” The words “against the will” are not more expressive than are the words “unlawfully, willfully, feloniously, forcibly, and violently.” The latter words imply that the money was taken against the will of the person robbed. State v. Patterson, 42 La. Ann. 934, 8 South. 529.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
67 So. 26, 136 La. 345, 1914 La. LEXIS 1952, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wilson-la-1914.