The accusation must state the offense charged in ordinary and concise language without repetition and in such manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended.
HISTORY:
Laws 1909, ch. 36, § 5; Code 1915, § 3958; C.S. 1929, § 96-109; 1941 Comp., § 10-306; 1953 5-3-6.
Notes to Decisions
Indictment.
Defendant’s conviction for unlawful possession of one buck deer without head and horns was reversed because the complaint did not make clear the offense with which the defendant was charged; it was unclear whether the defendant had been charged with possession of the carcass of an immature deer, failure to preserve the horns, or possession outside of the close of the season. State v. McMath, 1929-NMSC-094, 34 N.M. 419, 283 P. 51, 1929 N.M. LEXIS 92 (N.M. 1929).
Sufficiency.
Formal presentment by a grand jury or a formal charge upon information of a district attorney was not required under former 1915 Code, § 3957 (now 10-4-3 NMSA 1978) to initiate an action to remove a public officer or confer jurisdiction on the district courts to entertain such a removal proceeding, and a county sheriff’s application for a writ of prohibition to prevent removal proceedings against him was denied. A complaint filed by the State as party plaintiff, signed by an assistant district attorney, and supported by the affidavits of persons named in the title of the case who allegedly had knowledge that the county sheriff had engaged in acts of official misconduct was sufficient under former 1915 Code, § 3958 (now this section) because the complaint stated the offense charged in ordinary language such that a person of common understanding knew what was intended. State ex rel. Mansker v. Leib, 1915-NMSC-071, 20 N.M. 619, 151 P. 766, 1915 N.M. LEXIS 67 (N.M. 1915).