Reports of Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Indiana (Volume 173) (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1910. Excerpt: ... Cotner v. State--173 Ind 1U8. Instruction six, given by the court, is in legal effect 5. and almost in identical terms with instruction two, refused, and hence the giving of the latter was properly denied. Of its own motion the court gave to the jury a series of instructions numbered from one to seven, inclusive, "to the giving of numbers five and seven of said series the 6. defendant at the time excepted." This is another exception in gross, taken jointly as to both. The only complaint against instruction seven is that it informed the jury that if it found, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant committed the offense in 7. the county at any time within two years next prior to the return of the indictment, it might convict, the point made being that, under such a charge, the jury might search the defendants' conduct for two years and convict him of the offense of carrying concealed weapons on any date, whether it be the one intended by the indictment or not. There is nothing in the point. Time is not of the essence of the offense charged. It is not necessary to charge or to prove the precise date, when time is not an indispensable ingredient of the offense, but it is sufficient if shown to have been within the statute of limitations--in this case, two years. 2046 Burns 1908, Acts 1905, p. 584, 175; Shell v. State (1897), 148 Ind. 50; Armstrong v. State (1896), 145 Ind. 609; Fleming v. State (1894), 136 Ind. 149. Instruction seven being proper, the joint exception was not available even if instruction five was improper, which we by no means concede Appellant also seeks to bring before this court for review certain language and conduct of an assistant attorney for the State in his argument to the jury. The motion for a 8. new trial exhibi...