Beckley v. State

Decided February 3, 1922

Indiana Court of Appeals · decided 1922-02-03

<p>Criminal Law. — Motion in Arrest of Judgment. — Time for Making. — A motion in arrest of judgment must be made before judgment.</p>

Relies on Hilligoss v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, & St. Louis Railroad

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1922-02-03

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 1955

5 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

McMahan, J.

¶1Appellant was convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a girl under eighteen years. Several days after the judgment was rendered, he filed a motion in arrest of judgment, which was overruled. The only error assigned is that the court erred in overruling this motion. Since a motion in arrest of judgment must be made before judgment and not after, there was no error in overruling this motion. Hilligoss v. Pittsburgh, etc., R. Co. (1872), 40 Ind. 112; 16 C. J. p. 1263, §2814.

¶2Judgment affirmed.