Sewall v. State

Decided April 15, 1834

Certainty in indictment — defacing or altering ear marks. An indictment must describe the offence with such certainty as to apprise the defendant what he is to answer, that he may shape his defence and plead the judgment in bar. An indictment for defacing an ear mark does not attain to such certainty which does not set out the mark alleged to be altered or defaced, or describe the alteration or how defaced.

Decided 1834-04-15

BY THE COURT,

¶1stopping Tracy in reply. This indictment attains to no certainty, not even to a common intent. It is necessary 484] * that the state attain to such certainty as to notify the defendant what he is to answer, in order that he may shape his defence to meet it, and be enabled to plead in bar of any future prosecution, an acquittal or conviction under it. This indictment does not do so ; it should set forth the existing mark, and describe its alteration, or the manner as near as may be it is alleged to be defaced.

¶2The judgment is reversed.