Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

121 U.S. 281

Parkinson v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States

Submitted April 15, 1887.

Decided April 18, 1887.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1887-04-18

<p>CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION OF OPINION FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA.</p> <p>The case is stated in the opinion of the court.</p>

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““The prosecution was under sections 5511 and 5512 of the Revised Statutes, which made the offenses charged punishable by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, or by imprisonment not more than three years, or both. As the imprisonment may be ‘for a period longer than one year,’ the court can order that it shall be in the penitentiary. Rev. Stat. § 5541, This makes the crime ‘infamous,’ within the meaning of the Blfth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and the prosecution should have been by indictment and not by information.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including United States v. Stovall

Relies on Wilson · Mackin v. United States

Cited in Bouvier (1914)’s definition of “Infamous Crime”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Certification to/from lower court · 8–0 · Decided 1887-04-18

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1980 · most notably Medley (1890), Claasen (1891)

14 federal appellate · 19 district · 11 state decisions

13018871890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1certificate of division of opinion · Case Law">CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION OF OPINION FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA.

¶2Offenders against the provisions of §§5511 and 5512 Rev. Stat. must be prosecuted by indictment and not by information, as the nature of the punishment makes the crime “ infamous” within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

¶3The case is stated in the opinion of the court.

¶4No appearance for plaintiff.

¶5Mr. Assistant Attorney General Mawry for defendant.

¶6Mr. Chief Justice Waite

¶7delivered the opinion of the court.

¶8This case comes here on a certificate by the judges of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Nevada, that they were opposed in opinion on certain questions which arose at the hearing of a writ of error for the review of the rulings of the District Court of the district at the trial of Bichard B. Parkinson, on an information by the district attorney, for unlawfully, fraudulently,' and feloniously voting at an election for a representative in Congress from Nevada, and for unlawfully, fraudulently, and feloniously registering his name as an elector qualified to vote at such election. The prosecution was under §§ 5511 and 55Í2 of the Bevised Statutes, which made the offences charged punishable by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, or by imprisonment not more than three years, or both. As the imprisonmc ul may be “ for a period longer than one year,” the court can order that it shall be in the' penitentiary. Bev. Stat. $ 5541. This makes the crime “infamous,” within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and the prosecution should have been by indictment and not by infer*282mation. It was so decided by this court, after this case was certified up by tbe Circuit Court, in Ex parte Wilson, 114 U. S. 417, and Mackin v. United States, 117 U. S. 348. As the judgment of the District Court must be reversed for this cause; the questions certified have become immaterial, and their determination unnecessary in the final disposition of the case. We, therefore, remand the case without answering them. Reversed.

/121/us/281 · .json · Public domain