State v. Bell

Minnesota Supreme Court
State v. Bell, 26 Minn. 388 (Minn. 1880)
4 N.W. 621; 1880 Minn. LEXIS 179
Cornell

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 2 citing opinions

Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.

State v. Bell

Opinion of the Court

Cornell, J.

The allegation in the body of the complaint, that the assault was committed “at the city of Minneapolis, in said county,” clearly refers to the county named in the venue stated in the caption thereof, and therefore indicates with sufficient certainty the place where the offence was committed. The offence charged was a simple assault. The averment that defendant “did wilfully and unlawfully assault the complainant with a revolver” imports, ex vi termini, an intentional attempt by violence to do a bodily injury to the complainant. The omission to specify'the particular acts relied *389upon to show the intention and the attempt, if a defect at all,' is not one of which the defendant can complain, after a full trial upon the merits, without objection. " .

Judgment and sentence of the court below affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
State of Minnesota v. Justus B. Bell
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published