People v. Lopez

Fitzgerald, C. The information upon which the defendant was tried and convicted of the larceny of a horse is claimed to be fatally defective, because it fails to charge that the offense was committed feloniously.

At common law, simple larceny, whether grand or petit, was a felony, and was defined to be the felonious taking and carrying away of the personal goods of another. The word “ feloniously” was therefore essential to the validity of an indictment for larceny, and it has been uniformly held that this word, when used in a statute or constitution without being defined, should be construed to have the meaning affixed to it by the common law. But our statute has modified the common-law system of pleading and the rule of procedure in many important respects, and prescribed certain simple rules by which alone the sufficiency of such pleading shall be determined. These rules, or such of them as have a direct bearing on the question under consideration, are contained in the following sections of the Penal Code:—

Section 948 provides that “ all the forms of pleading in criminal actions, and the rules by wdiich the sufficiency of pleadings is to be determined, are those prescribed by this code.”

Section 957 provides that “ the words used in an indictment or information are construed in their usual acceptance in common language.”

Section 958 provides that the “ words used in a statute to define a public offense need not be strictly pursued in the indictment or information, but other words conveying the same meaning may be used.”

[572]Section 959, subdivision 6, provides that the indictment or information is sufficient if it can be understood therefrom “ that the act or omission charged as the offense is clearly and distinctly set forth in ordinary and concise language, without repetition, and in such a manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended.”

Section 960 further provides “ that no ... . information is insufficient .... by reason of any defect .... in matter of form, which does not tend to'the prejudice of a substantial right of the defendant upon its merits.”

And section 1258 provides that “ after hearing the appeal, the court must give judgment without regard to technical errors or defects .... which do not affect the substantial rights of the parties.”