People v. Southwell
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Municipal Criminal Court of the City and County of San Francisco. The defendant was indicted for forgery, and, on being arraigned, he challenged the panel of the Grand Jury, and moved to set aside the indictment, specifying as one of the grounds of his motion that the indictment had not been found as prescribed by the statute.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Municipal Criminal Court of the City and County of San Francisco. The defendant was indicted for forgery, and, on being arraigned, he challenged the panel of the Grand Jury, and moved to set aside the indictment, specifying as one of the grounds of his motion that the indictment had not been found as prescribed by the statute. He alleged that the Board of Supervisors had failed to comply with the law (Stats. 1863, p. 573,) in preparing the General Grand Jury list; that none of the district lists were certified, and four of the twelve were not even signed by the Supervisors…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The defendant was indicted for a criminal offense, but was not held to answer prior to the finding of the indictment. On his arraignment "lie moved to set aside the indictment, on the ground that certain irregularities had occurred in select*146ing, summoning, and impaneling the Grand Jury. The motion was denied, and this ruling is assigned as error.
In its legal effect the motion was a challenge to the panel of the Grand Jury, and proceeded on the assumption that by reason of the irregularities complained of it was an illegal body which had usurped the functions of a Grand Jury, and…
2Cited by21 opinions
- People v. WelchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Bruner v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Evans v. Willis, County JudgeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- People v. GrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Mabry v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1888
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.