The United States v. Mays

• Decision Date: 01 September 1880
• Citation: 1 Idaho 763
• Parties: The United States, Respondent, v. William Mays And W. H. Overholt, Appellant.
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

1 Idaho 763

The United States, Respondent, v. William Mays And W. H. Overholt, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Idaho

September 1, 1880

TERRITORIAL DISTRICT COURTS-PRACTICE IN.-The territorial district courts are not district courts of the United States. The legislature may prescribe the practice in the district courts of the territory, in cases arising under the constitution and laws of the United States, as well as in those arising under the laws of the territory. In this territory, however, the legislature has not done so; and the courts are at liberty to make orders and adopt regulations concerning the practice in the United States cases, for themselves.

TERRITORIAL COURTS-JURISDICTION.-The courts of the territory are in some respects sui generis. They have a broader and more extensive jurisdiction than state courts, or the district and circuit court of the United States.

JURY FROM THIS VICINAGE.-A jury summoned under the laws of the territory from the county in which the district court is being held, for the transaction of business under the territorial laws, may be adopted by the court for the transaction of business and the disposition of cases arising under the laws of the United States. Such a jury is, in every respect, from the vicinage, since it is drawn from the district within which the crime was committed, although the commission of the crime took place in another county of the district.

IDEM.-Congress having, by law, given the district courts of the territory jurisdiction of offenses against the laws of the United States, and having given the justices of the supreme court power to fix, the times and places of holding district courts; by so fixing them they have also fixed the place of trial of offenses against the laws, of the United States. Congress, therefore, having, by means of the power thus delegated, fixed the place of trial, has disposed of all questions of jurisdiction of the court, as well as all objections to the jury as not being drawn from the vicinage.

INSTRUCTIONS.-An instruction to the jury "that if they believe from the evidence that the defendants feloniously took possession of the United States mail, or any part thereof, by force or intimidation of or from a carrier of the mail, then the offense of robbery is complete," is simply a definition of the term robbery, as applied to the case. It is not erroneous.

INDICTMENT.-An indictment must contain so many of the substantial words of the statute as shall enable the court to see on what statute it is framed, and such other words as are necessary to a complete description of the offense; or words which are their equivalents or more than their equivalents in meaning.

IDEM-JEOPARDY.-Jeopardy is putting in danger. The word "danger" is the equivalent of jeopardy. The words of an indictment, "in bodily fear and danger of his life, then and there feloniously, did put," are equivalent to the words "put his life in jeopardy."

DANGEROUS WEAPONS, USE OF.-For a person to arm himself with dangerous weapons and carry them to the place of the robbery, with intent to kill, is the "use of dangerous weapons."

APPEAL from the Second Judicial District.

F. E Ensign, for the Appellants. Huston & Gray, for the Respondent.

MORGAN C. J.,

delivered the opinion;

PRICKETT J., concurring. BUCK, J., having prosecuted in the court below as United States district attorney, took no part in the hearing or decision.

In November, 1879, the defendants were held by James Stout Esq., United States commissioner, to await the action of the grand jury on a charge of robbing the United States mail in Owyhee county, Idaho territory. At the January term of the district court, held at Boise City, Ada county, Hon. H. E. Prickett presiding, a grand jury was summoned in conformity with the provisions of section 27 of an act concerning grand and petit jurors of the territory of Idaho, approved January 10, 1873, and were impaneled and sworn as a territorial grand jury. They were then charged and directed to inquire into offenses committed against the United States, in the second judicial district of which the said Ada and Owyhee counties were a part.

Defendants interposed a challenge in writing to the panel, on the ground that the said grand jury were not selected, summoned, or impaneled in accordance with any law of the United States, and that they had no jurisdiction to inquire into offenses against the laws of the United States, or any offense committed outside the limits of the county of Ada, which challenge was disallowed by the court, to which ruling defendants excepted. The said grand jury afterward, to wit, on January 13, 1880, found and reported to the court a bill of indictment against the said defendants for robbing a carrier of the United States mail, of such mail in Owyhee county, in said territory.

Afterward, on the seventeenth day of January, 1880, the said defendants were brought into court to be tried for said offense, by a jury selected in conformity with the laws of said territory,

from the county of Ada alone, and summoned by the sheriff of said county. Before said jury were sworn and impaneled, the said defendants interposed a challenge to the whole panel and array of said jurors in writing, as follows, to wit: "That the offense to be tried was an offense against the laws of the United States, and that the said jury had not been drawn, selected, or summoned in conformity with any law of the United States"; which challenge was disallowed by the court, and the said defendants then tried, convicted, and sentenced to imprisonment in the territorial prison, at hard labor, for the period of their natural lives.

The part of the indictment necessary to notice is as follows: "The said defendants, William Mays and William H. Overholt, are accused by the grand jury, by this indictment, of the crime of robbing a United States mail carrier, of the United States mail, committed as follows: The said William Mays and William H. Overholt, on the twentieth day of November, 1879, at the county of Owyhee, in the territory of Idaho, in and upon one Joseph Goodwin, the said Joseph Goodwin then and there being a carrier of the United States mail, and the said Joseph Goodwin then and there having the said mail in his possession, feloniously did make an assault, and the said Joseph Goodwin, in bodily fear and danger of his life, then and there feloniously did put, and of the said mail then and there of the property of the United States, and of the value of one thousand dollars, from the person and possession, and against the will of the said Joseph Goodwin, then and there feloniously, and with force and violence, did rob, take, steal, and carry away, the said William Mays and William H. Overholt each then and there being severally armed with a dangerous weapon, to wit, a gun, with intent, if then and there resisted by the said Joseph Goodwin, the said Joseph Goodwin then and there to kill, against the peace," etc.

The instruction offered by the prosecution objected to by the defendant, and given by the court, is as follows: "The jury are instructed, that if they believe from the evidence that the defendants feloniously took possession of the United States

mail, or any part of it, by force or intimidation of or from a carrier of the mail, then the offense of robbery was complete."

The first and second objections to the proceedings of the court below are to the manner of summoning and impaneling the grand and trial juries. We have examined all the authorities cited which discuss the method of summoning juries for territorial co...