Case ID: ky_284/html/0174-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Judge Rees", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Hargis v. Commonwealth.
    Oct. 22, 1940.
    J. S. Sandusky, Judge.
    N. W. Klein for appellant.
    Hubert Meredith, Attorney General, and W. Owen Keller, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
   Opinion of the Court by

Judge Rees

Reversing.

The grand jury of Pulaski county indicted William Hargis for obstructing public justice, a common law misdemeanor. On bis trial be was convicted and bis punishment fixed at a fine of $50 and five days’ imprisonment in tbe county jail. He bas prayed an appeal, and seeks a reversal because tbe trial court erred in two respects: (1) In overruling bis demurrer to tbe indictment; and (2) in overruling bis motion for a directed verdict of acquittal at tbe conclusion of all tbe evidence. Both grounds will have to be sustained.

Tbe indictment charged that tbe accused “did unlawfully commit the offense of obstructing public justice at a time when Ralph Gann was being searched for by tbe officers of tbe law and at a time when said officers were in about 60 ft. of said G-ann, tbe defendant took tbe said Ralph Gann into bis automobile and escaped tbe officers with said Gann and thereby prevented said officers from placing said Gann under arrest.” Tbe indictment failed to charge that tbe accused knew that tbe officers were searching for Ralph Gann for the purpose of arresting him or that he took Gann away in his. automobile with the intention of assisting Gann to escape. The proof also failed to show that appellant knew Gann had committed any offense or that the officers were searching for him. Gann had been drinking and had engaged in a difficulty with his wife at his home. He left his home and went to a poolroom in Somerset where he saw appellant and asked him to drive him to the country. He had committed no offense in the presence of the officers, and no warrant had been issued for his arrest. There is no proof of the existence of the essential elements of the offense for which appellant was tried. The Attorney General concedes that the judgment should be reversed.

The motion for an appeal is sustained, the appeal granted, and the judgment reversed for proceedings consistent herewith.