Genett v. State, 24847.
| Decision Date | 16 December 1925 |
| Docket Number | No. 24847.,24847. |
| Parties | GENETT v. STATE. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Perry County; Elbert Swan, Judge.
John Genett was convicted of criminal conspiracy to commit a felony, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Oscar Minor and Ed. Lincoln, both of Cannelton, and W. E. Cox, of Jasper, for appellant.
Arthur L. Gilliom, Atty. Gen., and Edward J. Lennon, Jr., Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State.
The appellant was found guilty of criminal conspiracy to commit a felony. The charge was made pursuant to section 2647, Barns' 1914, which provides as follows:
“Any person or persons who shall unite or combine with any other person or persons for the purpose of committing a felony, within or without this state; or any person or persons who shall knowingly unite with any other person or persons, body, association or combination of persons, whose object is the commission of a felony or felonies, within or without this state, shall, on conviction, be fined not less than twenty-five dollars nor more than five thousand dollars, and imprisoned in the State Prison not less than two years nor more than fourteen years.”
The purposed felony was “perjury” as defined by section 2375, Burns' 1914.
A motion was made to quash the affidavit for the reason that the facts stated therein do not constitute a public offense, and for the further reason that the affidavit does not state the offense with sufficient certainty.
[1] It is necessary in an affidavit under this section to specify the felony which was purposed, and the affidavit under such section, to be sufficient, must be as specific and full as an entire affidavit charging the commission of such felony itself. Landringham v. State, 49 Ind. 188.
[2] The charge against the defendant in this case is conspiracy to commit the crime of perjury, and to make the affidavit sufficient the charge of perjury must be as complete as though the defendant himself was charged with the crime of perjury, and the negation of facts on which the perjury is predicated must be as broad as the facts alleged on which the charge of perjury itself is based. Stefani v. State, 124 Ind. 3, 24 N. E. 254.
[3] The appellant claims there is no allegation in the affidavit that the appellant and John Hanaway knew, at the time of the formation of the conspiracy as alleged in the affidavit, the testimony of Hanaway was to be false. Nor does the affidavit allege that Hanaway knew at the time he testified that what he was testifying to was false. The appellant's contentions are not sustained by the record.
The affidavit alleges that John Genett and John Hanaway at said county and state, on or about the 7th day of January, 1923, did then and there, as this affiant is informed and verily believes, unlawfully, knowingly, and feloniously unite, combine, conspire, confederate, and agree to and with each other, for the object and purpose and with the unlawful and felonious intent to have and procure the said John Hanaway to testify falsely before the circuit court of the county of Dubois in the state of Indiana, and before a jury duly and legally impaneled in and by said court, in a matter material to a certain issue which was then and there joined in said court between the state of Indiana as plaintiff and one Frank Genett as defendant, in a certain action wherein the said Frank Genett as such defendant was charged with the crime of murder in the first degree, which said action had before that time been commenced and was then pending in and before the said circuit court of the said county of Dubois in said state of Indiana, and which said issue in said cause was, on the 22d day of January, 1923, legally and in due form of law tried in said circuit court of the said county of Dubois; that for the purpose of carrying out the said unlawful and felonious agreement so made by and between the said John Genett and John Hanaway and with each other as aforesaid, and for the object and purpose and with the unlawful and felonious intent on the part of the said John Genett and John Hanaway to have and procure the said John Hanaway to willfully and corruptly testify falsely in a matter material to the issue made and joined in said cause, in the trial thereof in the said circuit court, of the said county of Dubois, on or about the 22d day of January, 1923, at said county of Dubois, in the circuit court of said county, and in the state of Indiana, the said John Hanaway appeared as a witness for and in behalf of the said Frank Genett, the defendant in said cause, and was then and there duly sworn by Charles H. Bartley, clerk of said Dubois circuit court, as a witness, the said Charles H. Bartley, as such clerk, then and there having full power and complete...
To continue reading
Request your trial