Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

21 Ind. 236

Webb v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1863

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1863-11-15

<p>Criminal Law and Practice. — An affidavit is substantially good, which charges that the defendant, “on, &c., at, &c., did feloniously steal, take away, lead, ride, and drive away, one dun-colored horse,” &e.</p> <p>Continuance. — An affidavit for a continuance, in which the affiant can not state the names of witnesses he wants, nor where they reside, or can be found, is insufficient.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 1891

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1863-11-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Prosecution against Webb for larceny in stealing a horse. He was first arrested and committed upon an affidavit made before Mayor Cavin, of Indianapolis. Smithers. who made the affidavit, signed it below the jurat, between it and the name of the Mayor, who administered the oath to Smithers, and certifies to its having been taken. This is a mere informality.

¶2The information charges that the defendant led and rode away the horse, being the personal goods and property of, &c.

¶3It is urged that the defendant could not have both led anrode the horse away, and that the horse was not goods. The objection is insufficient.

¶4An affidavit was made for a continuance; but the affiant did not know the names of the witnesses he wanted,, nor where they resided, or could be found. It was not error to refuse the continuance.

¶5On the evidence, the conviction can not be disturbed. The horse had been taken in the night from the owner’s stable; the defendant was soon after seen in possession of it, and gave no reasonable account, &c.

¶6The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

/21/ind/236 · .json · Public domain