Brown v. State

• Decision Date: 22 October 1895
• Citation: 64 N.W. 749,91 Wis. 245
• Parties: BROWN v. STATE.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

91 Wis. 245

64 N.W. 749

BROWN

v.STATE.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Oct. 22, 1895.

Error to circuit court, Waukesha county; A. Scott Sloan, Judge.

Fred Brown was convicted of perjury, and brings error. Reversed.

The plaintiff in error was arrested on a complaint which charged him with the crime of perjury, committed during the trial of a cause in the county court of Waukesha county on the 7th day of October, 1892. Being brought before the magistrate who issued the warrant, he waived examination, and was held to answer in the circuit court. In the circuit court an information was filed charging him with the crime of perjury committed during the trial of a cause in the circuit court for Waukesha county on the 16th day of December, 1892. The plaintiff in error pleaded in abatement that he had no examination for the offense charged in the information. The court overruled his plea in abatement. The information was as follows: “I, C. E. Armin, district attorney for said county, hereby inform the court that on the 16th day of December, A. D. 1892, at said county, Fred Brown did, being lawfully required to depose the truth, on his oath legally administered in the circuit court in and for the county of Waukesha, and state of Wisconsin, in a certain action then and there pending, wherein Mary E. Higgins, known as Mary E. Thompson, was appellant, against the estate of Jones B. Higgins, deceased, and being then and there required in said case before said court, respecting matters therein in controversy, to testify therein as authorized by law, willfully and corruptly commit the crime and offense of perjury, in this, to wit: That he was present at the marriage ceremony of Jones B. Higgins and Mary E. Thompson, in the city of Milwaukee, April 5, 1892, and saw said marriage ceremony performed, and was a witness thereto, whereas, in truth and fact, the said Fred Brown was not present at the said marriage ceremony, and did not see the marriage ceremony performed; and where the said marriage ceremony was never performed, as the said Fred Brown then and there well knew. And that said testimony was material to the trial of the said case, as said defendant then and there well knew,--against the peace and dignity of the state of Wisconsin.” The trial resulted in the conviction of the defendant. He moved in arrest of judgment on the ground of the want of a preliminary judgment, and that the court had no jurisdiction to sentence him. The motion was overruled, and the plaintiff in error was sentenced to four years in the state prison.D. J. Hemlock, for plaintiff in error.

W. H. Mylrea, Atty. Gen., for the State.

NEWMAN, J. (after stating the facts).

It is evident that the charge of having committed the crime of perjury by giving false testimony in the county court on the 7th day of October, 1892, and the charge of having committed the crime of perjury by giving false testimony in the circuit court on the 16th day of December, 1892,...