Case ID: ky_64/html/0011-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "JUDGE ROBERTSON", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CASE 4 — INDICTMENT
    DECEMBER 6.
    Hensley vs. Commonwealth.
    APPEAL PROM HARLAN CIRCUIT COURT.
    1. A conviction on an indictment for stealing Stephen Daniel’s hog, upon proof that the defendant stole Philip Daniel’s hog, held to be erroneous. The offense charged and that proved being essentially different, the indictment was not legal notice of the crime intended to be proved. The conviction for stealing Stephen’s hog would not bar another prosecution for stealing Philip's hog, even though the same hog and the same offense.
    Leonard Farmer, For Appellant,
    CITED—
    1 Duvall, 91; Mount vs. Commonwealth.
    
    18 B. Mon., 493 ; White vs. Commonwealth.
    
    3 Metcalfe, 5; Commonwealth vs. Perrigo.
    
    
      Section 129; Grim. Code.
    
    
      Sec. 256-7, and 8, pp. 257 and 8, Amer. Grim. Law. Wills’ Cir. Ev., 71-2.
    2 Duvall, 435; Butler vs. Commonwealth.
    
    John M. Harlan, Attorney General, For Appellee,
    CITED—
    3 Greenleafs Ev., sec. 161, Sfc.
    
   JUDGE ROBERTSON

delivered the opinion on the court:

Indicted for stealing Stephen Daniel’s bog, the appellant was convicted on proof of stealing the hog of Philip Daniel. The offense charged and that proved being thus essentially different, the indictment was not legal notice of the crime intended to be proved; and the conviction for stealing Stephen's hog would not bar another prosecution for stealing Philip's hog, even though the same hog and the same offense.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial or dismission of the prosecution.