People v. Jackson,

CourtNew York Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtVANN
Citation84 N.E. 65,191 N.Y. 293
Decision Date03 March 1908
PartiesPEOPLE v. JACKSON.

191 N.Y. 293
84 N.E. 65

PEOPLE
v.
JACKSON.

Court of Appeals of New York.

March 3, 1908.


Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

Moses Jackson was convicted of bribery, and from an order granting a motion in arrest of judgment (47 Misc. Rep. 60,95 N. Y. Supp. 286) the people appealed. The order was reversed (121 App. Div. 856,106 N. Y. Supp. 1046), and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

The defendant was indicted for the crime of bribery in that, while a coroner of the borough of Manhattan, upon an information duly laid before him as such, he issued a warrant to arrest one John W. Alexander for causing the death of Maria Smith at the town of Montclair, in the state of New Jersey, by a criminal act done by him in the borough of Manhattan, in the state of New York; that said Alexander, when arrested by virtue of said warrant and arraigned before the defendant as coroner, was admitted to avail, and an undertaking in due form of law was given for his appearance for examination on said charge; that while said proceeding was still pending before the defendant as coroner he corruptly and feloniously asked and agreed to receive from one Benjamin Reass, the attorney for said Alexander, a bribe in the sum of $500, upon the agreement that his official action as coroner ‘should be influenced thereby; and that, in consideration thereof, he the said Moses J. Jackson, would, after the hearing of the said charge against the said John W. Alexander, order that said John W. Alexander should be discharged.’ There was neither allegation nor proof that the dead body of Maria Smith had ever been in the state of New York, or that it had been viewed by the defendant.

After a trial upon said indictment before the recorder presiding at the Court of General Sessions of the Peace the jury found the defendant guilty. Thereupon a motion was made for an arrest of judgment, and an order was granted arresting judgment accordingly upon the ground that the facts stated in the indictment do not constitute a crime. The district attorney appealed from said order to the Appellate Division, which reversed the same, and remitted the matter to the Court of General Sessions of the Peace to proceed according to law. The defendant appealed to this court.

[84 N.E. 66]


[191 N.Y. 295]Julius M. Mayer and Frank Moss, for appellant.

191 N.Y. 296]William Travers Jerome, Dist. Atty. (Robert C. Taylor, of counsel), for respondent.
VANN, J. (after stating the facts as above).

The learned recorder held that the indictment was defective because it charged that the suspicious death, which was the subject of inquiry before the defendant as coroner, is alleged to have occurred in the state of New Jersey, while the act causing death is alleged to have been done in the state of New York.

The statute under which the indictment was found provides that ‘a judicial officer * * * who asks, receives, or agrees to receive a bribe * * * upon any agreement or understanding that his vote, opinion, judgment, action, decision or other official proceeding, shall be influenced thereby’ is guilty of a felony. Pen. Code, § 72.

It is provided by the statute governing the duties of coroners that, ‘whenever a coroner is informed that a person has been killed or dangerously wounded by another, or has suddenly died under such circumstances as to afford a reasonable[191 N.Y. 297]ground to suspect that his death has been occasioned by the act of another by criminal means, or has committed suicide, he must go to the place where the person is and forthwith inquire into the cause of the death, or wounding, * * * and if it shall appear from the sworn examination of the informant, or complainant * * * that any person, or persons, are chargeable with the killing or wounding, or that there is probable cause to believe that any person or persons are chargeable therewith, and if such person or persons, be not in custody, he must forthwith issue a warrant for the arrest of the person or persons charged with such killing or wounding; and upon the arrest of any person or persons, chargeable therewith, he must be arraigned before the coroner for examination, and the said coroner shall have power to commit the person or persons so arrested to await the result of the inquisition or decision.’ Code Cr. Proc. § 773.

Section 783 provides that the coroner, ‘when the defendant is brought before him, must proceed to examine the charge contained in the inquisition or...

To continue reading

Request your trial
39 practice notes
  • State v. Dougherty, No. 40892.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • 7 Enero 1949
    ...Houts v. McCluney, 102 Mo. 13; Grenshaw v. O'Connell, 150 S.W. (2d) 489; Queathan v. Modern Woodmen, 148 Mo. App. 33; People v. Jackson, 191 N.Y. 293, 84 N.E. 65; Gould v. State, 46 N.Y.S. (2d) 313; State v. Allison, 153 Pac. (2d) 141. (5) But even if the defendant was required to notify ev......
  • United States v. Defreitas, 20-3115
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 21 Marzo 2022
    ...must be part of an official's duties coincides with how the term was defined in early state-court cases. See, e.g., People v. Jackson , 191 N.Y. 293, 299, 84 N.E. 65 (1908) (holding that an act was an "official action" as the official could only solicit a bribe because "[h]e dealt with a su......
  • Nell v. State, No. 70--744
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 6 Septiembre 1972
    ...164 A. 360 at 363. Another case cited admits outright that the weight of authority on this question is the other way. People v. Jackson, 84 N.E. 65 at In 115 A.L.R. 1255, we find the following: 'It is a universal principle that an offense committed in connection with an act outside the offi......
  • Puckett v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 21 Septiembre 1922
    ...Cyc. 319, 320; Beal's Cr. Pl. § 151, p. 156; Old's Case, 18 Grat. (59 Va.) 930; Matthews' Case, 18 Grat. (59 Va.) 9S9; People v. Jackson, 191 N. Y. 293, 84 N. E. 65, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1173, 14 Ann. Cas. 243. The principle established by these authorities is that an indictment is fatally d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
39 cases
  • State v. Dougherty, No. 40892.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • 7 Enero 1949
    ...Houts v. McCluney, 102 Mo. 13; Grenshaw v. O'Connell, 150 S.W. (2d) 489; Queathan v. Modern Woodmen, 148 Mo. App. 33; People v. Jackson, 191 N.Y. 293, 84 N.E. 65; Gould v. State, 46 N.Y.S. (2d) 313; State v. Allison, 153 Pac. (2d) 141. (5) But even if the defendant was required to notify ev......
  • United States v. Defreitas, 20-3115
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 21 Marzo 2022
    ...must be part of an official's duties coincides with how the term was defined in early state-court cases. See, e.g., People v. Jackson , 191 N.Y. 293, 299, 84 N.E. 65 (1908) (holding that an act was an "official action" as the official could only solicit a bribe because "[h]e dealt with a su......
  • Nell v. State, No. 70--744
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 6 Septiembre 1972
    ...164 A. 360 at 363. Another case cited admits outright that the weight of authority on this question is the other way. People v. Jackson, 84 N.E. 65 at In 115 A.L.R. 1255, we find the following: 'It is a universal principle that an offense committed in connection with an act outside the offi......
  • Puckett v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 21 Septiembre 1922
    ...Cyc. 319, 320; Beal's Cr. Pl. § 151, p. 156; Old's Case, 18 Grat. (59 Va.) 930; Matthews' Case, 18 Grat. (59 Va.) 9S9; People v. Jackson, 191 N. Y. 293, 84 N. E. 65, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1173, 14 Ann. Cas. 243. The principle established by these authorities is that an indictment is fatally d......
  • 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