Indictment

A written accusation against one or more persons of a crime or misdemeanor, presented to, and preferred upon oath or affirmation by, a grand jury legally'convoked.

4 Bla. Com. 209; Co. Litt. 126; 2 Hale, PI. Cr. 152.

An accusation at the suit of the crown, A written accusation of a crime presented upon oath by a grand jury. The word Is said to be derived from the old French word inditer, which, signifies to indicate, to a Jiow, or point out. Its object is to indicate the offence charged against the accused.

Rey, dea Inat. VAngl. tome2, p. 347.

A presentment and indictment differ; 2 Inst. 739. A presentment is properly that which the grand jurors find and present to the court from their own knowledge or observation. Every indictment which is found by the grand jurors is presented by them to the court; and therefore every indictment is a presentment, but not every presentment is an Indictment; Com. v. Keefe, 9 Gray (Mass.) 291; Story, Const § 1784. An indictment is required under United States laws for capital or otherwise Infamous crimes, but an information is authorized in many states; Beavers v. Henkel, 194 U. S. 73, 24 Sup. Ct. 605, 48 L. Ed. 882, where it is said that an indictment is prima facie evi-^ dence of probable cause. See the requirements of an indictment in Pettibone v. U. S., 148 U. S. 204, 13 Sup. Ct. 642, 37 I* Ed. 419.

— The eaaential requiaitea of a valid indictment are, — flrat, that the indictment be presented to some court having jurisdiction of the offence stated therein; and the indictment must allege specifically that the crime was committed within its jurisdiction; Mc- Coy V. State, 22 Neb. 418, 35 N. W. 202; Orr V. State, 25 Tex. App. 453, 8 S. W. 644; Smith V. State, 25 Tex. App. 454, 8 S. W. 645; State v. Hobbs, 37 W. Va. 812, 17 S. E. 380; second, that it appear to have been found by the grand jury of the proper county or district; third, that the indictment be found a true bill, and signed by the foreman of the grand jury; fourth, that it be framed with sufficient certainty;

— for this purpose the charge must contain a certain description of the crime or misdemeanor of which the defendant is accused, and a statement of the facts by which it is constituted, so as to identify the accusation; 2 Hale, PI.

Cr. 167; Stewart v. Com., 4 S. & R. (Pa.) 194; 4 Bla. Com. 301; Brown v. State, 26 Tex. App. 540, 10 S. W. 112; it should set out the material facts charged against the accused; State v. O’Flaherty, 7 Nev. 153; Pettibone v. U. S., 148 U. S. 197, 13 Sup. CL 642, 37 L. Ed. 419; the ultimate facts and not the evidence; Brown V. U. S., 143 Fed. 60, 74 C. C. A. 214; but need not specify the statute on which founded; Crabb v. State, 88 Ga. 584, 16 S. B. 455. An indictment may charge a statutory offence in the language of the statute without greater particularity when, by that means, all that is essential to constitute the offence is stated fully and directly, without uncertainty or ambiguity; State v. LlghL 17 Ann. 170, 8 South. 664; fifth, the Indictment must be In the English language.

— But if any document in a foreign language, as a libel, be necessarily introduced, it (should be set out in the original tongue, and then translated, showing its application; 6 Term 162. Each count is, as it were, a separate indictment; Selvester v. TJ. S., 170 U. S. 262, 18 Sup. Ct 580, 42 L. Ed. 1029. Intent must be averred if a part of the offence; U. S. v. Clark, 126 Fed. 92. Tfie formal requisites Sire: First, the venue, which at common law should always be laid in the county where the offence has been committed, although the charge be in its nature trausltory, as a battery; Hawk. PI. Cr. b. 2, c. 25, s. 35. See People V. Scott, 74 Cal. 94, 15 Pac. 384. The venue Is stated in the margin thus: "City and county of, to wit.” Second, the presentment, which must be in the present tense, and is usually expressed by the following formula: “The grand inquest of the commonwealth of, inquiring for the city and county aforesaid, upon their oaths and affirmations present.” See, as to the venue, Graham v. State, 1 Ark. 171; Hite V. State, 9 Yerg. (Tenn.) 357; Turns v. Com., 6 Mete. (Mass.) 225; People v. Wong Wang, 92 Cal. 277, 28 Pac. 27(J. Third, the name and addition of the defendant; but in case an error has been made in this respect, it is cured by the plea of the defendant; Bac. Abr. Misnomer (B), Indictment (G 2); 2 Hale, PI. Cr. 175; 1 Chitty, Pr. 202; Russ. & R. 489. Where the defendant’s name is stated differently in different parts of the indictment, it is fatally defective; Kinney v. State, 21 Tex. App. 348, 17 S. W. 423;

— or where it fails to state his given name, or aver that it is not known, a plea of misnomer in abatement should be sustained; Turner v. People, 40 111. App. 17; Panoho v. State, 25 Tex. App. 402, 8 S. W. 476;

— or where It gives a wrong name; Lewis v. State, 90 Ga. 95, 15 S. E. 697. See Idem Sonans. Fourth, the names of third persons, when they must be necessarily mentioned in the indictment, should be stated with certainty to a common intent, so as sufficiently to inform the defendant who are his accusers. When, however, the names of third persons cannot be ascertained, it is sufficient, in some cases, to state “a certain person or persons to the Jurors aforesaid unknown.*’ 2 East, PI. Cr. 661, 781; 2 Hale, PL Cr. 181; 8 C. & P. 773. Fifth, the time when the offence was committed should, in general, be stated to be on a specific year and day. In some offences, 6s In perjury, the day must be precisely stated;