State v. Wilson

67 So. 26, 136 La. 345, 1914 La. LEXIS 1952
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedNovember 4, 1914
DocketNo. 20711
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

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.

Bluebook
State v. Wilson, 67 So. 26, 136 La. 345, 1914 La. LEXIS 1952 (La. 1914).

Opinions

SOMMBRVILLE, J.

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.

[1, 2] Defendants argue that the information against them was filed under section 809, Revised Statutes. In this, they are mistaken. It was filed under section 810. The robbery with which they are charged was of money from the person of Zenor; and robbery from the person is provided for in section 810. The prior section (809) is more directly applicable to “the robbery of goods and chattels.”

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

Burdette v. Commonwealth
78 S.W.2d 13 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1935)
State v. Verret
142 So. 688 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1932)
Shehany v. Lowry
152 S.E. 114 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1930)
State v. Massey
204 S.W. 541 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1918)
State v. Doremus
68 So. 605 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
67 So. 26, 136 La. 345, 1914 La. LEXIS 1952, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wilson-la-1914.