State v. Heaton
| Decision Date | 07 April 1899 |
| Parties | STATE v. HEATON. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Appeal from superior court, King county; William Hickman Moore Judge.
W. H Heaton was indicted for forgery. From an order setting aside the indictment, the state appeals. Affirmed.
Thomas M. Vance and S.D. King, for the State.
John F Dore, Solon T. Williams, and Abraham Lincoln Jacobs, for respondent.
The defendant (respondent here) was indicted for forgery by the grand jury of King county. A motion to set aside the indictment was made by counsel for defendant, on several grounds. The superior court sustained the motion upon the third ground,--'that there were present before the grand jury during the investigation of the charge against the defendant persons other than the grand jurors and those required or permitted by law, to wit, special counsel appointed by the court.' There are three judges of the superior court in King county. The prosecuting attorney of the county had filed an information against one of the defendants, charging him with the crime of forgery. A demurrer was interposed, and sustained by one of the judges, and on appeal the judgment was affirmed by this court. 49 P. 493. Other informations were filed against respondent's co-defendant, Smith, and demurrers filed and sustained. New informations were thereafter filed by the prosecuting attorney, and defendant Smith paid to the county the amount he had appropriated to his own use, which was the proceeds of the alleged forgery. The prosecuting attorney then filed a statement in the superior court, and asked the dismissal of the information so filed, and one of the judges of the superior court thereupon entered an order dismissing such informations. Thereafter two of the judges of the superior court convened a grand jury for the express purpose of investigating the prosecuting attorney's office. The grand jury was impaneled, and special counsel were appointed by one of the judges of the superior court to advise with the grand jury. A few days thereafter the grand jury reported to the court that it had primarily entered into an inquiry into the office of the prosecuting attorney, and made a full and exhaustive examination, and that the prosecuting attorney was, in its judgment, exonerated from any corrupt or illegal act in the discharge of the duties of his office, and that he acted, as he believed, in the best interests of the county relative to the dismissal of the information; but, in the opinion of the grand jury, he erred in judgment in moving the dismissal of the Smith suit, and the jury therefore recommended to the court that the criminal charge against Smith and Heaton and others be investigated, and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. It also recommended that special counsel be appointed by the court, because, in its opinion, by the dismissal of the informations against the defendants the judgment of the prosecuting attorney as to the law and the facts in the case was so compromised that any steps taken by him necessary to the end indicated would be so embarrassed that the aid of special counsel was rendered necessary. After the return of the grand jury was made, the prosecuting attorney appeared in court, and requested that he be permitted to advise with the grand jury, and comply with his duties as prosecuting attorney. The judge of the superior court, after considering the matter, disregarded the request of the prosecuting attorney, and ordered that special counsel act as advisers to the grand jury. Such special counsel were in daily attendance upon the grand jury, advising them and aiding them in their deliberations. During the sitting of the grand jury, the indictment in this case was found.
By statute, the duties of the prosecuting attorney are prescribed. He is to have supervision and charge of all criminal proceedings in his county, to sign all informations and draft indictments, and generally to institute and prosecute proceedings of a criminal nature. 2 Ballinger's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taylor v. State
...Fed. Cas. No. 15,364, per Chief Justice Marshall, and United States v. Cobban (C. C.) 127 F. 714, as also 12 Cyc. 531. In State v. Heaton, 21 Wash. 59, 56 P. 843, the Court recognized in terms the implied power of the trial court to appoint counsel, but held that under their statute the pow......
-
Coblentz v. State, 21.
...death, or disability of the state's attorney regularly serving, and it does not fit the description of the order passed. State v. Heaton, 21 Wash. 59, 56 P. 843; Sayles v. Genesee Circuit Judge, 82 Mich. 84, 46 N. W. 29. It is section 7 of article 26 that provides for the appointment of "as......
-
Lee v. Jasman
... ... ¶ 6 As a result of his conduct on June 26, 2009, the State of Washington charged Jerry Jasman with unlawful imprisonment in violation of RCW 9A.40.040, a class C felony. Because of a possible conflict of ... Westerman v. Cary, 125 Wash.2d 277, 298, 892 P.2d 1067 (1994); Hoppe v. King County, 95 Wash.2d 332, 339, 622 P.2d 845 (1980); State v. Heaton, 21 Wash. 59, 62, 56 P. 843 (1899). RCW 36.27.030 provides: Disability of prosecuting attorney. When from illness or other cause the ... ...
-
Westerman v. Cary
...where a statute provides for such an appointment. Hoppe v. King Cy., 95 Wash.2d 332, 339, 622 P.2d 845 (1980); State v. Heaton, 21 Wash. 59, 62, 56 P. 843 (1899). RCW 36.27.030 Disability of prosecuting attorney. When from illness or other cause the prosecuting attorney is temporarily unabl......