Green v. State

Decision Date04 June 1901
Docket Number19,542
Citation60 N.E. 941,157 Ind. 101
PartiesGreen v. The State
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

From Henry Circuit Court; W. O. Barnard, Judge.

From a conviction for conspiracy to blackmail, defendant appeals.

Reversed.

W. A Brown, M. E. Forkner, G. D. Forkner and H. H. Evans, for appellant.

W. L Taylor, Attorney-General, and W. R. Steele, for State.

OPINION

Baker, J.

Appellant was convicted of conspiracy to blackmail. The error assigned is the overruling of her motion to quash the information.

The information charged that Alice Green (and others) on, etc., at, etc., "did then and there unlawfully and feloniously conspire, confederate and agree to and with each other to unlawfully and feloniously charge and accuse one William W. Southard of certain immoral conduct, which, if true, would tend to disgrace him and bring him into ridicule and contempt of society, to wit, to charge and accuse him of having upon divers occasions had illicit sexual intercourse with one Rose Green, a female, who was then and there pregnant with a bastard child, and to unlawfully and feloniously accuse him of being the father of said bastard child, with the intent then and there and thereby to extort from the said William W. Southard money, chattels and valuable securities, the kind, character and value of which money and valuable securities are unknown."

So much of the conspiracy and blackmailing statutes as need be considered, read: "Any person or persons who shall unite or combine with any other person or persons for the purpose of committing a felony * * * shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined * * * and imprisoned in the state prison * * *." § 2260 Burns 1894, § 2139 R. S. 1881 and Horner 1897: "Whoever * * * accuses or threatens to accuse * * * any person * * * of any immoral conduct, which, if true, would tend to degrade and disgrace such person, or in any way to subject him to the ridicule or contempt of society, * * * with intent to extort or gain from such person any chattel, money, or valuable security, * * * is guilty of blackmailing, and shall, on conviction thereof, be imprisoned in the state prison * * *." § 1999 Burns 1894, § 1926 R. S. 1881 and Horner 1897.

In pleading a conspiracy to commit a felony, the elements of the intended felony must be fully disclosed, so that the court may see that a public offense is in fact charged. Landringham v. State, 49 Ind. 186; State v. McKinstry, 50 Ind. 465; Scudder v. State, 62 Ind. 13; Miller v. State, 79 Ind. 198; Smith v. State, 93 Ind. 67; McKee v. State, 111 Ind. 378, 12 N.E. 510; Musgrave v. State, 133 Ind. 297, 32 N.E. 885; Barnhart v. State, 154 Ind. 177, 56 N.E. 212.

The gist of the felony defined as blackmailing is the extortion of money, chattels or valuable securities from a person by threatening to expose his crimes or...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • McNamara v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • June 24, 1932
    ...to be extorted, but is the extortion-the method by which the criminal seeks to extort the property of his victim. Green v. State (1901) 157 Ind. 101, 102, 60 N. E. 941. The thing sought to be extorted was the pecuniary advantages of Staggenborg's employment. The fact that the grand jury all......
  • Williams v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • May 9, 1919
    ...such money, bribes, etc., were the property of the persons to be solicited. In this connection our attention is called to the case of Green v. State, supra, where it is stated: "In pleading a conspiracy to a felony, the elements of the intended felony must be fully disclosed, so that the co......
  • McNamara v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • June 24, 1932
    ... ... reference to the thing [203 Ind. 608] to be extorted. The ... gist of the crime of blackmailing is not the thing ... sought to be extorted, but is the extortion -- the ... method by which the criminal seeks to extort the property of ... his victim. Green v. State (1901), 157 Ind ... 101, 102, 60 N.E. 941. The thing sought to be extorted was ... the pecuniary advantages of Staggenborg's employment. The ... fact that the grand jury alleged "the exact nature" ... of such advantages was unknown to it does not invalidate the ... indictment ... ...
  • Williams v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • May 9, 1919
    ...particularity as though the accused was to be tried for the felony alone. Allen v. State, 183 Ind. 37, 45, 107 N. E. 471;Green v. State, 157 Ind. 101, 60 N. E. 941;Barnhart v. State, 154 Ind. 177, 56 N. E. 212;Smith v. State, 93 Ind. 67;Woodsmall v. State, 179 Ind. 697, 102 N. E. 130. [2][3......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT