State v. Hudson
State v. Cephus Hudson.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Btnum, J.
Tbe defendant was indicted for an assault and 'battery, in a bill drawn in tbe ordinary form. Tbe jury for their verdict returned “ that the said Cephas Hudson is guilty -of shooting.” Shooting at wrhat ? In what direction ? If at any human object, was that object within the carrying distance of the gun, so as to constitute an assault ? If the indictment had charged that the assault was made by shooting at the prosecutor, possibly the verdict could be sustained by the reasonable certainty of its meaning, to be obtained by construing the bill and verdict together. But the instrament contains no such charge, and the verdict standing by itself is therefore senseless, certainly it is not responsive to the indictment. The courts should never allow such absurd and irre- *247 sponsive verdicts to be recorded. They should have the jury to correct them, so as to be in conformity to law and to present an intelligent record.
State v. Arrington, 3 Murph. 511 . There is error.
Per Curiam. Judgment arrested.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 10 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.