Lambert v. People
New York Supreme Court
jjj January last, the plaintiff in error was convicted of . , . „ _ . r>-vr a conspiracy m the oyer and terminer of the city of JNewYork; and sentenced to be imprisoned.
Read the full summary
jjj January last, the plaintiff in error was convicted of . , . „ _ . r>-vr a conspiracy m the oyer and terminer of the city of JNewYork; and sentenced to be imprisoned. He prosecuted a wrjt of error, which was returned on the 4th of May, 1827. On that day, his attorney assigned errors, alleging for diminuti0n, that the indictment was found in the -general sessions, and sent to the oyer and terminer; but there was no rule for this purpose entered in the general sessions; *and a certiorari to the judges of the sessions. The assignment also alleged for diminution, that there was no in-dictment…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
The certiorari to return diminution, need not" be .allowed by a judge. It was properly directed to the *courts below, and delivered to the clerk of the courts respectiyely, who may properly return it. But if he declines doing so, the motion to compel him to return, should, upon these writs, be made to the court below. Any rule to return, which we can make, must follow the writs; and *105be made upon the courts to which they are directed. We therefore, deny the motion for a rule against the clerk.
We also deny the motion for amended writs to the clerk; on the ground that they are properly…
2Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. RindskopfDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 1874
- McCann v. PeopleNew York Supreme Court · 1857