Home > Journals > Michigan Law Review > MLR > Volume 29 > Issue 4 (1931)
Abstract
The plaintiff was convicted of burglary under an indictment alleging that the article stolen was the joint property of two persons. The proof disclosed that it was the sole property of one of them, but this variance was at no time called to the attention of the lower court. On appeal, held, such variance was not reversible error. People v. Oswald (Ill. 1930) 172 N.E. 819.
Recommended Citation
CRIMES-PROCEDURE-VARIANCE BETWEEN INDICTMENT AND PROOF,
29
Mich. L. Rev.
511
(1931).
Available at:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol29/iss4/20