Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

181 Ark. 492

26 S.W.2d 876

Hicks v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 7, 1930

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1930-04-07

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 2005

2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

Relies on Dover v. State · Lewis v. State · Ferrel v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1930-04-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Pee Curiam.

¶1 Tom Hicks prosecutes this appeal to reverse a judgment of conviction for the crime of uttering a forg'ed instrument. There is no bill of exceptions, and the sole reliance for a reversal of the judgment is that the court erred in overruling the defendant’s motion in arrest of judgment. Under our statute, a judgment can only be arrested on the ground that the facts alleged in the indictment did not constitute a public offense within the jurisdiction of the court. Dover v. State, 165 Ark. 496, 265 S. W. 76; and Lewis v. State, 169 Ark. 340, 275 S. W. 663.

¶2 The indictment contains the essential elements of the crime charged as defined in Ferrel v. State, 165 Ark. 541, 265 S. W. 62. There is no error upon the face of the record, and the judgment will be affirmed.

/181/ark/492 · .json · Public domain