Skip to main content

State v. Davis

Citations

  • 106 Kan. 527
  • 188 P. 231
  • 1920 Kan. LEXIS 598

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Arson — Information—Motion to Quash — Election of Offenses. An information drawn under section 3425 of the General Statutes of 1915 was susceptible of the construction that it charged two offenses committed by one act. A motion to quash, alleging that the information attempted to charge two distinct crimes in one and the same count was denied. Then a motion filed by .the defendant asking the court to require the state to elect on which of the two offenses charged it would . proceed to try the defendant, was allowed, and the state made its election. Held, that no reversible error was committed.</p> <p>2. Same — Amendment of Information — Description of Property. It is ' not reversible error to- permit an information drawn under section 3425 of the General Statutes of 1915 to be amended concerning the description of the real property on which the offense was alleged .to have been committed, if 'the amended description corresponds with that contained in the complaint on which the warrant was issued.</p> <p>3. Same — Incorporation of Insurance Company Not Alleged — Too Late to Object After Verdict. ' After trial and verdict on an information 1 charging the burning of property - with intent to defraud the insurer ■■ thereof, it is too late to object for the first time to the information on the ground that it does not allege the incorporation of the insurance company.</p> <p>4. Same — Ownership of Property Burned Not Alleged — Too Late to -. Raise Question on Motion in Arrest of Judgment. An objection to an information drawn under section 3425 of the General Statutes of 1915, that the information does not allege the ownership of the property burned, comes too late when first presented in a motion in arrest of judgment after trial and verdict.</p> <p>5. Same — No New Arraignment After Amendment of Information. It is not error to place a defendant on trial without rearraignment, if he does not object, where the information has been proper

Judges: Marshall

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.