State v. Mowrey
| Decision Date | 29 June 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 9825,9825 |
| Citation | 429 P.2d 425,91 Idaho 693 |
| Parties | STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Phillip MOWREY, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
C. J. Hamilton, Coeur d'Alene, for appellant.
Allen G. Shepard, Atty. Gen., and William D. Collins, Asst. Atty. Gen., Boise, Everett Hofmeister, Jr., Sandpoint, for appellee.
The entire information, except the caption, upon which the appellant was charged and tried in the district court is as follows:
'Comes now Everett D. Hofmeister, Prosecuting Attorney of Bonner County, State of Idaho, and for and on behalf of the people of the State of Idaho informs the Court as follows:
'That the defendant, Phillip Mowrey, has wrongfully omitted without lawful excuse to furnish moneys for necessary food, clothing, shelter or medical attendance for his child, Rhonda Lee Mowrey, a minor child under the age of 16 years dependant upon the said Defendant for care, support and education all of which is contrary to Idaho Code provision 18-401 and against the peace and dignity of the State of Idaho.
'That the Defendant was arrested and charged with the foregoing offense and received a preliminary Hearing before the Honorable Margaret N. Burns on Tuesday, May 25, 1965, and was bound over to the District Court herein pursuant thereto.
'DATED this 30th day of June, 1965.
'/s/ Everett D. Hofmeister
EVERETT D. HOFMEISTER
Prosecuting Attorney
'States witnesses known at the time of filing this information:
Dixie Mowrey'
After a trial by jury the defendant was convicted and judgment entered sentencing him to the state penitentiary at hard labor for a period not to exceed two years. From this judgment this appeal was taken.
Appellant sets forth three specifications of error, none of which are material to the disposition of this cause on appeal, for at the time of oral argument the court called to the attention of the respective attorneys the fact that the locus criminis of the alleged offense had not been pleaded by the State in the information hereinbefore quoted. The court then granted counsel ten days, respectively, within which to file breifs concerning the legal effect of the failure to allege venue in the information.
The State waived its right to file a supplemental brief on this question, but a brief was regularly filed on behalf of appellant.
I.C. § 19-1418 provides, in part, as follows:
'The indictment in sufficient if it can be understood therefrom:
I.C. § 19-1304 makes the provisions of the code in relation to indictments applicable, as near as may be, to informations and proceedings thereon. Questions of venue in criminal cases are not merely matters of formal legal procedure, but raise deep issues of public policy in the light of which legislation must be construed; and where an information fails to allege that the offense was committed in the State of Idaho and within the jurisdiction of the court, it fails to state facts sufficient to confer to confer jurisdiction upon the district court of the county in which it is filed to try the defendant. It is a familiar and well-settled principle of law that the indictment must allege that the offense was committed within the jurisdiction of the court. State v. Slater, 71 Idaho 335, 231 P.2d 424; State v. Webb, 76 Idaho 162, 279 P.2d 634; State v. Cole, 31 Idaho 603, 174 P. 131; 27 Am.Jur., Indictments and Informations, § 64, p. 628, and § 76, p. 639; 21 Am.Jur.2d, Criminal Law, § 398, pp. 415-16; United States v. Johnson, 323 U.S. 273, 65 S.Ct. 249, 89 L.Ed. 236 (Del.1944).
The general rule is that proceedings conducted, or decisions made, by a court are void where there is an absence of jurisdiction over the subject matter; and where lack of jurisdiction over the subject appears on the face of the record, an appellate court may, on its own initiative, dismiss the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Lopez
...defense, which may be raised at any stage of the proceedings, even by an appellate court on its own initiative, State v. Mowrey, 91 Idaho 693, 429 P.2d 425 (1967), the defense of the failure to charge an offense may also be raised at any stage of the proceedings, whether the proceedings are......
-
State v. O'Neill
...the amendment. The Court addresses this issue on its own initiative. State v. Lopez, 98 Idaho 581, 570 P.2d 259 (1977); State v. Mowrey, 91 Idaho 693, 429 P.2d 425 (1967). II. THE STATUTE OF O'Neill argues that the three year statute of limitations in effect at the time of the commission of......
-
Hays v. State
...was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. State v. Pyne, 105 Idaho 427, 670 P.2d 528 (1983); State v. Mowrey, 91 Idaho 693, 429 P.2d 425 (1967). Such defects are not waived by the entry of a guilty plea. On the other hand, a valid guilty plea admits all essential alleg......
-
Luskin v. Department of Employment
...the orders of the Industrial Commission are reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith. See State v. Mowrey, 91 Idaho 693, 429 P.2d 425 (1967). No costs McFADDEN, J., and SCOGGIN, J. pro tem., concur. BAKES, Justice, dissenting: I disagree with the majority's conclusi......