State v. Johnson
| Decision Date | 27 November 1911 |
| Citation | 81 A. 657,82 N.J.L. 330 |
| Parties | STATE v. JOHNSON. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Certiorari to review indictment for violation of election law by Enoch L. Johnson. Heard on motion to quash indictment. Denied.
Argued November term, 1911, before GARRISON, PARKER, and BERGEN, JJ.
Edmund Wilson, Atty. Gen., for the State.
French & Richards and Gilbert Collins, for defendant.
The writ allowed in this proceeding brings into this court from the court of oyer and terminer of the county of Atlantic an indictment against the defendant, and a motion is now made to quash it. The indictment, among other things, sets out that at a general election held in Atlantic county in November, 1910, the clerks of the respective boards of registry and elections, as required by law, kept a register of the voters, and checked the names written therein as the voters deposited their ballots, and, after the canvass of the votes, the registers so checked were filed with the clerk of the county of Atlantic to be there preserved by him for a period of five years. The indictment then charges that thereafter the defendant "unlawfully, willfully, and with evil intent, and without warrant in the law, did carry away, remove, and withdraw said registers from and out of the possession of the said county clerk." The argument for the defendant is that the taking, carrying away, and withdrawal of the registers unlawfully and with evil intent is not made a crime by the statute, and therefore the indictment sets out no punishable offense.
Section 67 of the act concerning elections (P. L. 1898, p. 271) requires the registry list to be deposited with the county clerk after each election, and section 1 of a supplement to said act (P. L. 1908, p. 30) requires the county clerk to preserve such lists for five years. It seems to us that the duty imposed upon the clerk under the above legislation to preserve such registers in his office for the term of five years is a part of the election law intended to aid in insuring the purity of elections, and to assist in the discovery and prosecution of frauds, and that, if the clerk should allow such registry lists to go out of his possession during the forbidden period in such manner as to afford the opportunity to alter or mutilate them, it would be a violation of the act relating to elections, because in our opinion such registers are a part of the election proceedings. If the county clerk can allow the registers to be removed and carried away by any one who may apply for them, alterations and mutilations would be comparatively easy, and the registers become of small value as records of the manner in which the election had been conducted. We think it is clear that this legislation requires the county clerk to preserve these registers in the form he received them from the clerks of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. W. U. Tel. Co.
...83 N.J.L. 364, Page 189 85 A. 309 (Sup.Ct. 1912); State v. Proctor, 55 N.J.L. 472, 26 A. 804 (Sup.Ct. 1893); State v. Johnson, 82 N.J.L. 330, 81 A. 657 (Sup.Ct. 1911); State v. Davidson, Judge, 116 N.J.L. 325, 184 A. 330 (Sup.Ct. 1936); State v. Micone, 134 N.J.L. 177, 46 A.2d 663 (Sup.Ct. ......
-
State v. Ellenstein
...is so clearly and so plainly defective that this court can grant the motion". The opinion quotes with approval from State v. Johnson, 82 N.J.L. 330, 81 A. 657, as follows:—"It does not appear to us that it is so manifest that no judgment can be rendered on this indictment that it ought to b......
-
State v. Then
...this court held: "It is well to add that the court is always loth to quash an indictment except on the plainest ground. State v. Johnson, 82 N. J. Law, 330, 81 A. 657; State v. Ruffu, 150 A. 249, 8 N. J. Misc. 392. It was promptly quashed before, to permit a new indictment before the statut......
-
State v. Davidson, 212.
...or writ of error, State v. Sweeten, 83 N. J. Law, 364, 85 A. 309; Proctor v. State, 55 N. J. Law, 472, 26 A. 804; State v. Johnson, 82 N. J. Law, 330, 81 A. 657; especially where the statute has run, State v. Acton, 152 A. 857, 9 N. J. Misc. 55; State v. Tilton, 104 N. J. Law, 268, 140 A. 2......