indictment

It is elementary that an indictment, in order to be good under the Federal Constitution and laws, shall advise the accused of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, in order that he may meet the accusation and prepare for his trial, and that, after judgment, he may be able to plead the record and judgment in bar of further prosecution for the same offense.

In criminal practice. A written accusation against one or more persons of a crime or misdertieanor, presented to, and preferred upon oath or affirmation by, a grand jury legally convoked. 4 Bl. Comm. 299; Co. Litt. 126; 2 Hale, P. C. 152; Bac. Abr.; Comyn, Dig.; 1 Chit. Grim. Law, 168. An accusation at the suit of the crown, found to be true by the oaths of a grand jury. A written accusation of one or more persons of a crime or misdemeanor, preferred to and presented on oath by a grand jury, and by assent of twelve at least. 12 Conn. 452. The word is said to be derived from the old French word inditer, which signifies to indicate, to show, or point out. Its object is to indicate the offense charged against the accused. Rey des Inst. I'Angl. torn. 2, p. 347. A distinction has been taken between "indictment" and "presentment," the former by it found to be "a true bill"; while the latter is a return made by the grand jury of its own motion, upon which a bill of indictment was subsequently framed. 4 Bl. Comm. 301; 7 Grat. (Va.) 631. This distinction is no longer of much practical importance; an indictment in modern practice being both a finding and a presentment. See 9 Gray (Mass.) 290.

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;

An indictment is an accusation in writing found and presented by a grand jury, legally convoked and sworn, to the court in which it is impaneled, charging that a person therein named has done some act or been guilty of some omission, which, by law, is a public offense, punishable on indictment. Code Iowa 1880, § 4295 ; Pen. Code Cal. § 917; Code Ala. 1886, § 4364. And see Grin v. Shine, 187 U. S. 181, 23 Sup. Ct. 98, 47 L. Ed. 130; State v. Walker, 32 N. C. 236; Ex parte Hart, 63 Fed. 259, 11 C. C. A. 165, 28 L. R. A. 801; Ex parte Bain, 121 U. S. 1, 7 Sup. Ct. 781, 30 L. Ed. 849; Ex parte Slater, 72 Mo. 102; Finley v. State, 61 Ala. 201. A presentment differs from an indictment in that it is an accusation made by a grand jury of their own motion, either upon their own observation and knowledge, or upon evidence before them ; while an indictment is preferred at the suit of the government, and is usually framed in the first instance by the prosecuting officer of the government, and by him laid before the grand jury, to be found or ignored. An information resembles in its form and substance an indictment, but is filed at the mere discretion of the proper law officer of the government, without the intervention or approval of a grand jury. 2 Story, Const. §§ 1784, 1786.

In Scotch law. An indictment la the form of process by which a criminal is brought to trial at the instance of the lord advocate. Where a private party is a principal prosecutor, he brings his charge in what is termed the "form of criminal letters."

— Joint indictment. When several offenders are joined in the same indictment, such an indictment is called a "joint indictment;" as when principals in the first and second degree, and accessaries before and after the fact, are all joined in the same indictment. 2 Hale, P. C. 173; Brown.

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

An indictment is an accusation in writing found and presented by a grand jury, legally convoked and sworn, to the court in which it is impaneled, charging that a person therein named has done some act, or been guilty of some omission, which, by law, is a public offense, punishable on indictment. Code Iowa 1880, § 4295; Pen. Code Cal. § 917; Code Ala. 1886, § 4364. A presentment differs from an indictment in that it is an accusation made by a grand jury of their own motion, either upon their own observation and knowledge, or upon evidence before them; while an indictment is preferred at the suit of the government, and is usually framed in the first instance by the prosecuting officer of the government, and by him laid before the grand jury, to be found or ignored. An information resembles in its form and substance an indictment, but is filed at the mere discretion of the proper law officer of the government, without the intervention or approval of a grand jury. 2 Story, Const. §§ 1784, 1786.

In Scotch law. An indictment is the form of process by which a criminal is brought to trial at the instance of the lord advocate. Where a private party is a principal prosecutor, he brings his charge in what is termed the "form of criminal letters."

2 A written accusation of one or more persons of a crime or misdemeanor, preferred to and presented upon oath by a grand jury.' Indict. To charge with crime by means of an indictment. Indicted. Charged by indictment. Indictor atid indictee are not now in use. Indictable. Admitting of prosecution by indictment. "Rill of indictment. The written accusation presented to the grand jury, and found by them to be a "true bill" or " not a true bill." The indictment intended by the Vth Amendment is the presentation to the pi'oper court, under oath, by a grand jury, duly impaneled, of a charge describing an offense against the law for which the party may be punished.'' Ko change can be made in the body of such instrument without a re-submission to the grand jury — except where statutes prescribe othei-wise. But changes may be made in the " caption." * The object of indictment is, first, to furnish the accused with such a, description of the charge against him as will enable him to make his defense, and avail himself of his conviction or acquittal for protection against a further prosecution for the same offense; and, second, to inform the court of the facts alleged, so that it may decide whether they are suflftoieut in law to support a conviction if one should be hj.d.' The object is, that the defendant may know what to meet; that he may plead a;Eormer acquittal or conviction; and that he may take the opinion of the court before which he is indicted, by demurrer or motion in arrest of judgment, or, the opinion of a court of error on the suf Bciency of the statements in the indictment." Facts are to »e stated, not conclusions of law alone. A crime is made up of acts and intent; and these must be set forth with reasonable particularity of time, place, and cu-cumstances. Every ingredient of the offense must be clearly alleged. Where the definition of an offense includes generic terms, the indictment must state the species.' > '60 Mo. 420; 1 Pars. Contr. 45. ar. indicter, to accuse: L. L. indif Mre, to point out: L. indicere, to proclaim. 3 4 Bl. Com. 302. See also 4 Col. 203; 12 Conn. 452; 4 Mich. 424; 72 Mo. 106; 13 Wend. 317; 21 id. 570; 11 Ohio, n; 19 Ohio St. 255. 'Exp Bain, 120 U. S. 1, 6-0 (1887), cases. Miller, J. And see 26 Am. Law Reg. 416-47 (1887), cases. » United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 558 (1875), njnited States v. Bennett, 16 Blatoh. 350-51 (1879), Blatchford, J.; Bradlaugh v. The Queen, L. E.,3 Q. B. Where the offense is a common-law offense, the technical words of the common law must be usec\; where the offense is statutory, the substance of the words may be followed.' For a statutory offense, the charge must be so laid as to bring the case within the description of the offense given in the statute, alleging distinctly the essential requisites. Nothing is to be left to implication or intendment. It is sufficient to pursue the words of the act, or, if that would leave an ambiguity, then the substance and legal effect of the words.^ The I'ule that a statutory offense need not be charged in the words of the statute does not apply to technical terms and words of art which have acquired a conventional meaning and cannot be dispensed with, such as "murdered," "feloniously," and the like. But every material ingredient, constituting the description of the offense in the statute, whether an act done, knowledge had, an Intent or purpose entertained, or the existence of any collateral fact, must be afarmatively stated in plain, direct, intelligible language. = Where tue statute simply designates the offense, and does not in express terms name its constituent elements, the information must sometimes be expanded beyond the statutory terms.'' When a statute contains provisos and exceptions in distinct clauses, it is not necessary to state that the defendant does not come within the exceptions, or to negative the provisos. But if the exceptions are contained in the enacting clause, it will be necessary to negative them, that the description of the crime may in all respects correspond with the statute.' Where an offense may be committed by doing any one of several things, the indictment may, m a single count, group them together, and charge the defendant with having committed them aU, and a conviction may be had of any one of the things, without proof of the commission of the others." Several offenses of the same class or kind, growing out of the same transaction, though committed at different times, may be joined in the same indictment in separate counts.' Where the same offense is charged in different V. Cook, 17 WaU. 173-77 (18T3), cases; United States v. Hess, 184 U. S. 483 (1888), cases. 'United States i). Bachelder, 2 Gall. *18 (1814), Story, J.; Cannon d. United States, 116 U. S. 78 (1885), Cd.&6S ' United States v. Staats, 8 How. 44 (1850), Nelson, J. a Edwards v. Commonwealth, 19 Pick. 125 (1837), Shaw, C. J. See 4 Bl. Com, 307, 287; 11 F. R.,240; 2 Flip. 319; 87 Ind. 70; 30 Kan. 365, 612; 17 Nev. 280; 60 Pa. 848; 77Va. 54. 4 State V. Gavigan, 36 Kan. 327 (1887); 30 id. 365. See generally State v. CampbeU, 28 Tex. 46 (1867), cases: 94 Am. Dec. 863-58 (1888), cases. » 1 Chitty, Cr. L. 283 6, 284: United States v. Britton, 107 U. S. 670 (1882); United States v. Cook, 17 Wall. 173-74 (1872), cases. » Bork V. People, 91 N. Y. 13 (1863); State «. Gray, 29 Minn. 144 (1882), cases. 7 v. Wentworth, 11 F. E. 58 (1882); Exp. counts, the whole indictment may be submitted to the jm-y, with instructions, it they find the defendant guilty upon any count, to return a general verdict of guilty; otherwise, where one count is had, and the evidence thereon is submitted with the rest, against objection.' See Bad, 2. For a common-law offense, the conclusion of an indictment is "against the peace and dignity" of the commonwealth or State; for a statutory offense, " against the form of the statute in such case made and provided."'^ See Amendment, 1; Form, 2, Of statute. An indictment is to be distinguished from a presentment and an inform atioi^, gg. v. See also Abbreviations; Caption, 2; Challenge. 2; Commencement; Confession, 2; Copt; Crime; Demubrbr; Divers; Evidence; Exceeding; Idem, Sonans; Identity. 1; Ignore; Indorse, 1; Infamy; Jeofail; Joint; Jury; Negative; Or, 2; Nolle Prosequi; Nolo Contendere; Place, 1; Quash; Sentence; Xhen AND There; Verbum, In hsec. rWDIFFERENT. 1. Said of an appraiser, whei'e property has been taken in execution: impartial, free from bias. 3 2. Said of a juror: that the mind is in a state of neutrality as respects the person and the matter to be tried; that there exists no bias, for or against either party, calculated to operate upon him; that he comes to the trial vpith a mind uncommitted and prepared to weigh the evidence in impartial scales.* Compare Impartial.

crim. law, practice, is a written accusation of one or more persons of a crime or misdemeanor, presented to, and preferred upon oath or affirmation, by a grand jury legally convoked. 4 Bl. Com. 299; Co. Litt. 126; 2 Hale, 152; Bac.-Ab. h. t.; Com. Dig. h. t. (A); 1 Chit. Cr. L. 168. To render an indictment valid, there are certain essential and formal requisites. First, the essential requisites are, lst, that the indictment be presented to some court having jurisdiction of the offence stated therein; 2dly, that it appears to have been found by the grand jury of the proper county or district; 3dly, that the indictment be found a true bill, and signed by the foreman of the grand jury; 4thly, 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. Cowp. 682, 3; 2 Hale, 167; 1 Binn. R. 201; 3 Binn. R. 533; 1 P. A. Bro. R. 360; 6 Serg. & Rawle, 398; 4 Serg. & Rawle, 194; 4 BI. Con: 301; 3 Yeates, R. 407; 4 Cranch, R. 167. dthly, The indictment must be in the English language. But if any document ina out in the original tongue, and then translated, showing its application. 6 T. R. 162. Secondly, the formal requisites, are, Ist, the venue, which at common law should always be laid in the county where the offence has been committed, although the charge is in its nature transitory, as a battery. Hawk. B. 2, c. 25, 8. 35. The venue is stated in the margm thus, ‘“* City and county of Philadelphia, to wit.” 2dly, The presentment which must be in the present tense, and is usually expressed by the following formula, “the grand inquest of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, inquiring for the city and county aforesaid, upon their oaths and affirmations present.” 3dly, 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. Ab. Misnomer, (B); Indictment, (G 2); 2 Hale, 175; 1 Chit. Pr. 202. 4thly, 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.” Hawk. B. 2, c. 25, 8.71; 2 East, P.C. 651, 781; 2 Hale, 181; Plowd. 85; Dyer, 97, 286. Sthly, The teme when the offence was committed, should in general be stated to be on a specific year and day. In some offences, as in perjury, the day must be precisely stated, 2 Wash. C. C. Rep. 328; but although it is necessaty that a day certain should be laid in the indictment, yet, in general, the prosecutor may give evtdence of an offence committed on any other day previous to the finding 316. Vide 11 Serg. & Rawle, 177; 1 Chit. Cr. Law, 217,224; 1 Chit. Pl. Index, tit. Time. 6thly, The offence should be properly described. This is done by stating the substantial circumstances necessary to show the nature of the crime; and, next, the formal allegations and terms of art required by law. 1. As to the substantial circumstances. The whole of the facts of the case necessary to make it appear judicially to the court that the indictors have gone upon sufficient premises, should be set forth; but there should be no unnecessary matter or any thi which on its face makes the indictment repugnant, inconsistent, or abe surd. 2 Hale, 183; Hawk. B. 2, c. 25, 8s. 57; Bac. Ab. h. t. (G 1); Com. Dig. h. t.(G 3); 2 Leach, 660; 2 Str. 1226. All indictments ought to eharge a man with a particular offence, and not with being an offender in general: to this rule there are some exceptions, namely, a common barrator, a common scold, and the keeper of a common bawdyhouse, may be indicted by these general words. 1 Chit. Cr. Law, 230, and the authorities there cited. The offence must not be stated ia the disjunctive, so as to leave it une certain on what it is intended to rely @S an accusation; as, that the defen. dant erected or caused to be erected a nuisance. 2 Str. 900; 1 Chit. Cr. Law, 236.—2. There are certain terms of art used, so appropriated by the law to express the precise idea which it entertains of the offence, that no other terms, however synonymous they may seem, are capable of filling the same office: such, for example, as traitorously, (q. v.) in treason; feloniously, (q. v.) in felony; burglariously, (q. v.) in burglary; maim, (q. v-) in mayhem, &c. 7thly, The conclusion of the indictment should conform to the state on the subject, where there is such provision; as in Pennsylvania, Const. art. 5, s. 12, which provides, that “ all prosecutions shall be carried ‘on in the name and by the authority of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and conclude against the peace and dignity of the same.” As to the necessity and propriety of having several counts in an indictment, vide 1 Chit. Cr. Law, 248; as to joinder of several offences in the same indictment, vide 1 Chit. Cr. Law, 253; Arch. Cr. Pl. 60; several defendants may in some cases be joined in the same indictment, Ib. 255; Arch. Cr. P]. 59. When an indictment may be amended, sce Ib. 297; Stark. Cr. Pl. 286; or quashed, Ib. 299; Stark. Cr. Pl. 331; Arch. Cr. 66. Vide, generally, Arch. Cr. Pl. B.1, part 1, c. 1, p. 1 to 68; Stark. Cr. Pl. 1 to 336; 1 Chit. Cr. Law, 168 to 304; Com. Dig. h.t.; Vin. Ab.h.t.; Bac. Ab. h.t.; Dane’s Ab. h.t.; Nels. Ab. h. t.; Burn’s Just. h.t.; Russ. on Cr. Index, h. t. By the constitution of the United States, Amendm. art. 5, no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war, or ublic danger. -INDICTOR. He who causes another to be indicted. The latter is sometimes called the indictee. ©