Pruitt v. State

Citations

• 116 Miss. 33
• 76 So. 761

Syllabus

<p>1. Officers. Removal from office. Indictment. Sufficiency. Code 1906, Section 1309.</p> <p>Under Code 1906, section 1309, proyiding that an officer who shall be drunk when called on to perform the duties of his office shall be removed, it is necessary that the indictment should set out the particular duty which the defendant was called upon to perform at the time he is alleged to have been drunk.</p> <p>2. Same.</p> <p>It is a universal rule that it is essential to the validity of an indictment that the material facts constituting the offense must be alleged with certainty.</p> <p>3. Same.</p> <p>Merely being drunk occasionally, while not discharging a duty, nor being called upon to do so would not come within the statute.</p> <p>4. Indictment. Insufficiency. Curing i>y tyill of particulars. Code 1906, Section 1309.</p> <p>Where' an indictment under section 1309, Code 1906, providing for removal of officers if drunk when called upon to perform a duty was insufficient for not alleging the particular duty the officer wag called upon to perform, such indictment was not cured by a bill of particulars furnished by the district attorney.</p> <p>5. Statute. Indictments. Additional averments.</p> <p>It is well settled law in this state that indictments under a statute must go further than the language of the statute where it is necessary' to charge the facts in order to inform the accused of the nature and cause of the accusation.</p>