Page:Bone v. State (1940).pdf/2

 Scipio A. Jones and Elmer Schoggen, for appellant.

Jack Holt, Attorney General and ''Jno. P. Streepey'', Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

HOLT, J. Appellants were convicted of murder in the second degree and their punishment fixed at 21 years in the state penitentiary. They were tried jointly on an information charging them with the murder of Mrs. John Deaver.

Appellants have appealed and assign six errors for our review.

(1) They first contend that the trial court erred in overruling their demurrer to the information. The ground for this demurrer was that the information was not signed by the prosecuting attorney. The record reflects that the information in question had on it the name of the prosecuting attorney, "Fred A. Donham, Prosecuting Attorney," in print "By John T. Williams, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney." "John T. Williams" was signed with a pen. Appellants contend that the use of a form for the information, on which the name of the prosecuting attorney was printed, does not amount to the signing of the name of the prosecuting attorney by his deputy, and, therefore, does not meet the requirements as laid down by this court in the recent case of Johnson v. State, 199 Ark. 196. We cannot agree. In that case this court said:

""It is true that it is generally said that a deputy prosecuting attorney, legally appointed, is generally clothed with all the powers and privileges of the prosecuting attorney, but he must file the information in the name of the prosecnting attorney The deputy, of course, may file information in the name of the prosecuting attorney, but he signs the name of the prosecuting attorney, and then his name as deputy."" This exact question was before the supreme court of Oklahoma in Hardin v. State, 56 Okla. Crim. 440, 41 P.2d 922. That court held that '"when the county attorney's name is affixed to the information in print or in typewriting and is then signed by his duly appointed assistant, such subscription of the name of the county