Case ID: la_127/html/0332-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      LAND, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(53 South. 582.)
    No. 18,375.
    STATE v. THIBODEAUX.
    (Nov. 14, 1910.)
    
      (Syllabus by the Court.)
    
    Indictment and Information (§ 125*) — Sufficiency of Indictment.
    Where an indictment charged that the accused did commit “the crime against nature-’ by a certain specific act of carnal knowledge, and did then and there commit the crime of “sodomy,” held, that the two terms were used by the pleader as equivalents, and that two different crimes were not charged.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Indictment and Information, Cent. Dig. §§ 334-400; Dec. Dig. § 125.*]
    Appeal from Nineteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Martin; James Simon, Judge.
    Joseph Thibodeaux, Jr., was convicted of the crime against nature, and he appeáls.
    Affirmed.
    Edward N. Simon, for appellant. Walter Guión, Atty. Gen., and A. N. Muller, Dist. Atty. (R. G. Pleasant, of counsel), for the State.
   LAND, J.

The defendant was convicted and sentenced for the crime against nature, as denounced by section 788 of the Revised .Statutes of 1870.

In the court below the defendant moved the court to compel the prosecution to elect between the charge of “crime against nature” and the charge of “sodomy” contained in the indictment. The motion was overruled, and the defendant excepted.

The two terms are applied in the indictment to the same act of carnal knowledge, and were evidently used as equivalents. Marr’s Crim. Jur. La. p. 128, § 77.

Judgment affirmed.