
    The State v. Tuell.
    Obstructing Process—Indictment.—An indictment for obstructing the execution of a search warrant must show the warrant to be legal; and it must therefore show, that the warrant appeared upon its face to be founded on a sufficient affidavit.
    ERROR to the Jackson Circuit Court.
   Blackford, J.

J.— Indictment for obstructing process. The indictment states that, on, &c., at, &c., one Lawson Wrink made affidavit before a certain justice of the peace, that a certain heifer had been feloniously stolen, &c.; that he believed the neifer was concealed in or about the premises of one Benjamin P. Tuell of said county, &e.; that the justice, on said affidavit, issued his certain warrant under his hand and seal, commonly called a search warrant, to one James Fislar then and there being a constable in and for the township of Grassy Fork in said county, by which warrant the constable was then and there commanded to enter into the premises of the said Benjamin P. T-uett, &c.; that Jesse Tuell, *jun., on, &c., at, &c., unlawfully obstructed the execution of said search warrant, &c.

II. O’Neal, for the State.

II. P. Thornton, for the defendant.

The Circuit Court, on motion of the defendant, quashed the indictment.

An indictment for obstructing the execution of a search warrant must show the warrant to be legal; and it must therefore show, that the warrant appeared upon its face to be founded on a sufficient affidavit. Such a warrant is not described here, and the indictment is consequently defective.

Per Curiam.—The judgment is affirmed.  