United States v. Langford
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from Third District Court, Bingham County.. The court had no jurisdiction to try this cause, as the indictment shows that the offense charged was committed in Bear Lake, instead of Bingham county, and this court takes notice that Blaekfoot is in Bingham county.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Third District Court, Bingham County.. The court had no jurisdiction to try this cause, as the indictment shows that the offense charged was committed in Bear Lake, instead of Bingham county, and this court takes notice that Blaekfoot is in Bingham county. (U. S. Rev. Stats., secs. 1910, 1914; Clinton v. Englebrecht, 13 Wall. 434; Reynolds v. !United States, 98 U. S. 145; Miles v. United States, 103 U. S. 304.) Consent to a wrong is not given by silence in a criminal case. (People v. Dich, 37 Gal. 277; People v. Beeler, 6 Cal. 247; People v. Payne, 8 Cal. 344; People v. Demint,…
1Opinion of the CourtLogan, J.
The defendant was indicted by a grand jury of the United States at Blaekfoot, Idaho territory, at the June term of court, A. D. 1888, for a violation of section 3 of the act of Congress approved March 22, 1882, chapter 47, entitled “An act to amend section 5352 of the Revised Statutes of the United States in reference to bigamy, and for other purposes.” Under this indictment the defendant was tried and convicted on the twelfth day of October, 1888, and from that judgment he has appealed to this court. The errors which it is claimed by the defendant were committed by the court below are as…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Reynolds v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Cannon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- United States v. KuntzeIdaho Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. GrahamUtah Supreme Court · 1901
- United States v. HiggersonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Idaho · 1891