Case ID: la_162/html/0979-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "O’NIELL, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(111 So. 350).
    No. 28342.
    STATE v. BUCKHALT.
    (Jan. 3, 1927.
    Rehearing Denied Jan. 31, 1927.)
    
      (Syllabus by Editorial Staff.)
    
    Indictment and Information <&wkey;5l(l) — Bill of information signed by district attorney was not invalid because indorsement on back thereof was not signed by him.
    Bill of information signed by district attorney in his official capacity was not invalid because indorsement on back thereof of the number and title of the case, offense charged, and date of filing, was not signed by him.
    
      Appeal from Second Judicial District Court, Parish of Webster; John S. Richardson, Judge.
    O.E. Bucldialt was convicted of possessing intoxicating liquor for beverage purposes, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Thomas W. Robertson, of Shreveport, for appellant.
    Percy Saint, Atty. Gen., Percy T. Ogden, Asst. Atty. Gen., W. D. .Goff, Dist. Atty., of Arcadia (E. R. Schowalter, Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel), for the State.
   O’NIELL, C. J.

Appellant stands convicted of the offense of having intoxicating liquor in his possession for beverage purposes. The record contains two bills of exception, in which it is contended that the bill of information was invalid because the indorsement, on the back of it, of the number and title of the case, the offense charged and the date of filing, was not signed by the district attorney. There is neither a statutory nor common-law requirement that such an 'indorsement ón a bill of information shall be signed by the district attorney. The bill of information itself was signed by the district attorney in his official capacity, which is all that was necessary to verify the bill.

The verdict and sentence are affirmed.