State v. McGann

Citations

• 8 Idaho 40
• 66 P. 823
• 1901 Ida. LEXIS 50

Syllabus

<p>Information — Motion to Quash. — An information in a criminal case should not be quashed on the ground that a witness who testified that he was a physician, and lived in the county where the offense alleged was committed, did not state his occupation and place of residence.</p> <p>Same — Assignment of Error, How Made. — One of the errors assigned is that the court refused to quash the information, on the ground that “the depositions do not state the ground on which a question put to the witness was overruled.” Held, that this assignment of error is too general in its terms, and will not be reviewed on appeal.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Amending Certificate of Committing Magistrate— Jurisdiction. — The trial court permitted the committing magistrate to amend his certificate to the depositions taken before him at the preliminary examination at the county seat, which is outside his district, but in his county. Held, not error, and that the justice had jurisdiction to amend such certificate with leave of the court.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Information—County or Prosecuting Attorney.— A motion to quash an information in a criminal case, on the ground that the “prosecuting attorney” signed it as “county attorney,” is properly denied.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Evidence.—It is not error for the trial court to permit a witness to show what part of the body of deceased a wound was inflicted by pointing out the corresponding part of his own body.</p> <p>Criminal Information — Correcting Name of Witness on Same. — It is not error to permit the prosecuting attorney to correct an error made in indorsing the name of a witness on an information where there is no showing that it misled or prejudiced the defendant.</p> <p>.Evidence — Criminal Law.' — The state was permitted to show that within less than a half hour after the homicide the accused tore down and burned a house upon the land over which the controversy between the accused and the deceased arose. Held, that such evidence was admiss