Jones v. State 92 Ga. 480

Jones v. The State.

1. Overruling demurrer in indictment or motion to quash is not matter for motion for a new trial, but for direct exception. In this case, however, the ground of demurrer or motion to quash'was without merit, the word “ heifer ” evidently referring to an animal of the cow species, the indictment being for “ cow-stealing.”

.3. While the charge of the court was. not free from inaccuracy in stating rules of law, the guilt of the accused is so manifest under *481the evidence, that there was no error in denying a new trial. Parker v. The State, 34 Ga. 262.

July 10, 1893.

Indictment for cow-stealing. Before Judge Bower. Dougherty superior court. April term, 1893.

Jones was charged “with the offence of cow-stealing, for that ” he took and carried away with intent to steal “ one red heifer with white face, of the value of $10,” etc. Defendant demurred or moved to quash the indictment, upon the ground that no particular'species of animal was described, claiming that many animals are called heifers, to wit, cow, buffalo, camel, elephant, some species of deer, and others, and that the description did not charge any particular species of offence. He was found guilty, and his motion for new trial was overruled, The motion contains the grounds, that the court erred in overruling the demurrer or motion to quash; that the verdict is contrary to law, evidence, etc.; and that the court erred in certain parts of the charge to the jury; which are not material here.

J. W. Waiters, by Harrison & Peeples, for plaintiff in error. W. N. Spence, solicitpr-general, contra.