Commonwealth v. Nailor
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 244, April T., 1905, by defendant, from judgment of Q. S. Butler Co., June T. 1904, No. 28, on verdict of guilty in case of Commonwealth v. Lizzie Nailor. Indictment for perjury.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 244, April T., 1905, by defendant, from judgment of Q. S. Butler Co., June T. 1904, No. 28, on verdict of guilty in case of Commonwealth v. Lizzie Nailor. Indictment for perjury. Before Galbreath, P. J. From the record it appeared that the defendant moved to quash the indictment. 1. Because the bill of indictment is not based upon the information made before the committing magistrate and warrant issued in pursuance thereof, to-wit: April 22,1904, upon which defendant was arrested and after hearing gave bail for appearance to court, in that the record shows the information was made…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Smith, J.,
When an indictment contains more than one count, each count forms a distinct indictment, though the counts are signed collectively by the district attorney. Here each count is in form a complete indictment, signed by the district attorney. But the legal effect of this joinder is not changed by the form of the counts, or by, the district attorney’s signature to each ; the instrument remains in law an indictment containing two counts. And when a written instrument is contained on two or more sheets, it may be necessary that these should be fastened together to show their…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. GrantMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Power v. PriceCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1836
- Ross v. RouseNew York Supreme Court · 1828
- Crookshank v. GrayNew York Supreme Court · 1823
- Power v. PriceNew York Supreme Court · 1834
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BridgesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Commonwealth v. Brown RubinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942