Pankey v. People of State
| Decision Date | 31 December 1833 |
| Citation | 1833 WL 2687,1 Scam. 80,2 Ill. 80 |
| Parties | LEWIS PANKEY, plaintiff in error,v.THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, defendants in error. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
W. G. GATEWOOD, for the plaintiff in error.J. SEMPLE, Attorney General, for the defendants in error.
This case comes before the Court on a writ of error. The plaintiff in error was indicted, tried and convicted on a charge of perjury, in the Circuit Court of Pope county. A new trial was afterward awarded, the venue in the case changed to Johnson county, where a second trial and conviction was had. The plaintiff in error, while the cause was pending in the Circuit Court of Pope, and before pleading to the indictment, interposed a motion to quash the indictment, which was overruled by the Court; afterward a bill of exceptions to the decision of the Johnson Circuit Court was taken by consent of parties, and in which is embodied the evidence given in the cause on its trial in the Circuit Court of Johnson county. The indictment avers, that at a regular term of the Circuit Court of Pope county, before the grand jurors, regularly impaneled and sworn to inquire in and for said county, a certain complaint was made by one Lewis Pankey, against one John W. Womack, for taking illegal fees as a constable, in order to found an indictment against said Womack, as a constable of the said county, to be found by said grand jury; and that the said Lewis Pankey, being of lawful age, and being first duly sworn by the foreman of the said jury, the said foreman having lawful authority to administer the oath in that behalf, on being interrogated of and concerning the taking and receiving of said illegal fees, and whether the services for which such fees were taken had been performed at the request and by the consent of the said Lewis Pankey, he, the said Lewis, unlawfully and maliciously, intending to induce the jurors to find such bill of indictment against the said Womack, and to injure the said Womack, did falsely, knowingly and corruptly, by his own act and consent, depose and give in evidence, among other things, before the said jurors, in substance and to the effect “that he, the said Lewis Pankey, did not agree nor give orders to the said Womack, constable as aforesaid, to summon a jury in his case with Daniel Vineyard, before that time tried, nor was it his, the said Lewis Pankey's, wish, to have a jury to try it;” whereas in truth and in fact the said Lewis did agree and give orders to the said constable to summon a jury in his case with Daniel Vineyard, and was anxious and willing that his said case should be tried by a jury. It further avers that the matter thus alleged to have been sworn to, was material to the point of inquiry in issue before the grand jury, in this, that if the said Lewis had not agreed or given orders to the said...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bennett v. District Court of Tulsa County
...of common law origin. Our grand jury is a local tribunal, and can not inquire into offenses committed out of its jurisdiction.' Pankey v. People, 2 Ill. 80: will not be doubted that one of the essential ingredients necessary to constitute legal perjury, is that the tribunal or the body befo......
-
People v. Polk
...174 N.E.2d 393 ... 21 Ill.2d 594 ... PEOPLE of the State" of Illinois, Plaintiff in Error, ... Trannie POLK, Defendant in Error ... No. 36110 ... Supreme Court of Illinois ... April 26, 1961 ... \xC2" ... Pankey v. People, 1 Scam. 80; People v. Rogers, 348 Ill. 322, 180 N.E. 856, 82 A.L.R. 1124 ... It appears from the perjury indictment here ... ...
-
People v. Rogers
...before which the false swearing is alleged to have been committed shall have jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the cause. Pankey v. People, 1 Scam. 80.Where a decree of divorce is granted upon false testimony concerning the residence of one of the parties, the decree is void as to such ......
-
People v. Miller
... ... H. Whitaker, of Shelbyville, and Edward C. Craig, of Mattoon, for plaintiff in error.P. J. Lucey, Atty. Gen., J. K. Martin, State's Atty., of Sullivan, and A. B. Garrett, of East St. Louis (E. J. Miller, of Sullivan, of counsel), for the People.CARTWRIGHT, C. J.The grand jury of ... The statute is controlling, and it has been the practice in this state to allege the substance of [264 Ill. 152]false testimony. Pankey v. People, 1 Scam. 80;Kimmel v. People, 92 Ill. 457;Johnson v. People, 94 Ill. 507.[4] It is also insisted that the court ought to have quashed the ... ...