Skip to content

State v. Forrest

State of Louisiana v. Benjamin Forrest

State v. Forrest, 23 La. Ann. 433 (1871)

Court: Supreme Court of Louisiana · State Highest Courts
Decided: May 15, 1871
Docket: No. 2921
Judges: Ludeling
Citations: 23 La. Ann. 433

Cited by 7

Headnotes

In a criminal caso tlie accused is entitled to an appeal from tlie verdict of the jury and tha judgment of tho court thereon, if the offense charged is of sufficient magnitude to give the appellate court jurisdiction, without reserving bills of exceptions during the progress of the trial, or making a motion in arrest of judgment or making a formal assignment of errors apparent on the face of the record. 13 An. 486, 489. Except for the crimes of murder, arson, robbery, forgery and counterfeiting, all prosecutions must be commenced by tlie finding of the indictment or by filing the information within one year next after the offense shall liavo been committed. Revised Statutes of 1870, § 986. Therefore if the accused has been tried and convicted of the crime of liorso stealing, and has taken an appeal therefrom, the verdict will be set aside and the judgmont of the court below reversed, if the record shows that the information was not filed until more than one year had elapsed after the offense was committed.

Summary

APPEAL from the Fifth Judicial District Court, parish of East Baton Rouge.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Ludeling

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Ludeling, C. J.

The information, filed in this case on the eighth •of November, 1869, charged the defendant with having stolen a horse on or about the first day of January, 1863. He was convicted and ■sentenced, and he has appealed. There was no motion to quash the information, no bill of exceptions taken during the progress of the trial, no motion in arrest of judgment, nor formal assignment of errors on the face of the record.

But upon the authority of the cases of State v. Henderson and State v. Conner, 13 An. 486 and 489, which favor the liberty of the citizen, we feel it to be our duty to entertain the appeal.

It is not charged that the prisoner had fled from justice, or that the ■crime was not discovered or denounced until within one year before the information was filed. Except under these circumstances, the law prescribes that “no person shall be prosecuted, tried or punished for any offense, willful murder, arson, robbery, forgery and counterfeiting *434 excepted, unless tlie indictment or presentment for the same be found or exhibited within one 3rear next after the offense shall be done or committed,” etc. Revised Statutes of 1870, p. 195, § 980.

The conviction was on an information which is clearly insufficient,, as more than one year had elapsed between the commission of the offense and the prosecution.

It is therefore ordered that the verdict of the jury be sot aside, and. that the judgment of the district court be arrested.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 7 cases

View all citing references →

State Highest Courts7

Relies on it most ⓘ

State v. Bischoff84 So. 41 (La. 1919)
State v. Guillot9 So. 2d 235 (La. 1942)
State v. Melson108 So. 794 (La. 1926)
State v. Latil92 So. 2d 63 (La. 1956)
State v. Foley36 So. 940 (La. 1904)
State v. Carter123 So. 332 (La. 1929)

Most recent

State v. Latil92 So. 2d 63 (La. 1956)
State v. Guillot9 So. 2d 235 (La. 1942)
State v. Carter123 So. 332 (La. 1929)
State v. Melson108 So. 794 (La. 1926)
State v. Bischoff84 So. 41 (La. 1919)
State v. Dudley49 So. 12 (La. 1909)

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.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.