Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

116 Ind. 514

Durham v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 10, 1889

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1889-01-10

<p>Taxes. — Returning False List. — Penalty.—One who returns a false and fraudulent tax list is liable to the penalty prescribed in section 6339, B. S. 1881, and must he prosecuted in the mode therein prescribed, and not by indictment.</p>

Relies on Burgh v. State ex rel. McCormick · Durham v. State ex rel. Anderson

Decided 1889-01-10

Elliott, J.

¶1The indictment in this case charges that the defendant gave to the assessor a false and fraudulent tax list, and specifies the particular in which it was false and fraudulent. There was, therefore, some list, and as there was some list, the defendant is liable to the penalty prescribed in section 6339, R. S. 1881, and must be prosecuted in the mode therein prescribed, and not by indictment. He can not be prosecuted by indictment under that section. A defendant may be prosecuted by indictment under section 2150, where there is an unlawful failure or refusal to return any list at all, but not where a list is returned, although it is a false and fraudulent one. Burgh v. State, ex rel., 108 Ind. 132; State, ex rel., v. Lauer, ante, p. 162; Durham v. State, 117 Ind. 477.

¶2Judgment reversed, with instructions to quash the indictment.

/116/ind/514 · .json · Public domain