
    JOSEPH BRINSTER vs. THE STATE.
    COURT OF APPEALS,
    AUSTIN TERM, 1882.
    
      Indiatment for rape. — The form of an indictment for rape prescribed in chapter 57 of acts of 1881 (see page 61), is not sufficient, for the reasons stated in Williams vs. The State, decided at this term.
   Willson, J.

Opinion by The appellant was convicted of rape, the jury assessing his punishment at death.

The charging part of the indictment is as follows: that “Joseph Brinster, an adult male, did rape Mrs. Mattie McL. Davis, a female.”

This indictment does not allege a single act which enters into and composes one of the elements of rape. An indictment is a written statement of a grand jury accusing a person therein named of some act or omission punished by law. Subjecting the indictment in this case to the above definition, it evidently follows that it is no indictment at all. But we are not disposed to enlarge. See the case of Williams vs. The State, decided at this term. (June number Texas Law Reporter, page 222.) The judgment is reversed and prosecution dismissed.  