United States v. Butler
District Court, E.D. Michigan
At Law. On plea to indictment. Defendant was indicted for selling malt liquors without payment of the special tax required by law, and also for perjury, in swearing before a United States commissioner, upon his preliminary examination, that he did not .so sell. Upon his trial for selling liquor he was acquitted, and thereupon pleaded to the indictment for perjury autrefois .acquit.
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
It certainly strikes one as an anomaly that, after an acquittal for a criminal offense, a party may be put upon trial for perjury, in swearing that he was not guilty of that offense; but I do not think a plea of former acquittal is the proper way to take advantage of it. To make such a plea effective it must appear that the same evidence will sustain both indictments, and that they relate to the same *499transaction. Thus, if a person be acquitted of robbery, he cannot be convicted of larceny of the same property; nor, after conviction for arson, can a prisoner be tried for murder committed in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Coffey v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Burns v. PeopleNew York Supreme Court · 1848
3Cited by23 opinions
- United States v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Z. A. Adams and Jean Adams v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1961
- Allen v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1912
- In Re CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- In Re Application of HarronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.