McCarty v. State
| Decision Date | 06 June 1861 |
| Citation | 16 Ind. 310 |
| Parties | McCarty v. The State |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
APPEAL from the Vanderburgh Common Pleas.
The judgment is reversed, with costs Cause remanded.
Charles Denby, for the appellant.
James G. Jones, Attorney General, and E. B. Seymour, for the State.
This was a prosecution instituted in the Common Pleas, at the February term 1860, against John McCarty, for an assault, &c., with intent to murder. The information charges that the defendant, on December 19, 1859, at, &c., in and upon the body of one Richard McGregor, feloniously, &c., did make an assault; and with a certain knife which he, defendant, in his hand then had and held, the said McGregor, in and upon his back, then and there feloniously, &c. did strike, stab and cut, with intent in so doing, wilfully and of his deliberate and premeditated malice, him, the said McGregor, to kill and murder, contrary, &c. Motion to quash the information overruled. Plea, not guilty. Verdict for the State; upon which the Court, having refused motions for a new trial, and in arrest, rendered judgment.
The information is alleged to be defective, because it fails to show that the Common Pleas had jurisdiction of the felony with which the defendant was charged. It is enacted that the Circuit Courts, in their respective counties, shall have original exclusive jurisdiction of all felonies. 2 R S., § 5, p. 6. But, in a subsequent enactment it is provided, that "The Court of Common Pleas, in the several counties, shall have original jurisdiction of felonies not punishable with death, concurrent with the Circuit Court, in the following cases: 1. When a person is in custody on a charge of felony, before indictment by the grand jury. 2. When the person charged is on bail, and before indictment voluntarily, in person, or in writing, submits to the jurisdiction of the Court. 3. When a cause is reversed in the Supreme Court, on account of defects in the indictment and the defendant is in custody, and the proper Circuit Court is not in session. 4. When a defendant is remanded by the Supreme Court for further trial, for error other than defect in the indictment, and is in custody, and the proper Circuit Court is not in session at the time. 5. Such Court shall also have full power to try any criminal charge on change of venue from the Circuit Court, when the party is in custody, or voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Glaser v. State
...that, as to criminal causes, its jurisdiction is limited and may be obtained only through the methods prescribed by law, citing McCarty v. State, 16 Ind. 310;Justice v. State, 17 Ind. 56;Walker v. State, 23 Ind. 61; and Cobb v. State, 27 Ind. 133. In each of those cases the pleading-informa......
-
Glaser v. State
...to the contrary, it will be presumed on appeal that such action was in compliance with the statute. (1686.1 Burns Supp. 1929; McCarty v. State, 16 Ind. 310, others, distinguished.) p. 63. 10. INDICTMENT AND INFORMATION---Motion to Quash---Presumptions.---When a criminal pleading is tested b......
- Swinney v. State
-
Justice v. State
... ... jurisdiction of the Court below ... The ... Court of Common Pleas has jurisdiction in felonies, only in ... certain specified cases, and the information must, on its ... face, show such a state of facts as entitles the Court to ... entertain such jurisdiction. McCarty v. The ... State, 16 Ind. 310 ... In the ... information before us, no fact is alleged, giving the Court ... jurisdiction, unless it be that the defendant was in custody ... on a charge of felony, and that no indictment had been found ... against him. Whether this is ... ...