United States v. Sanges
144 U.S. 310 (1892)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Sanges, 144 U.S. 310 (1892)

United States v. Sanges

No. 1454

Argued January 12-13, 1892

Decided April 4, 1892

144 U.S. 310

Syllabus

A writ of error does not lie in behalf of the United States in a criminal case.

This was an indictment on sections 5508 and 5509 of the Revised Statutes (copied ante,144 U. S. 264, note) averring that while one Joseph Wright, a citizen of the United States, was returning to his home after having appeared and testified before the grand jury of the United States in obedience to subpoenas from the circuit court of the United States against persons charged with violations of the internal revenue laws, and while he was still a witness under such subpoenas, the defendants conspired to injure and oppress him in the free exercise and enjoyment of the right and privilege, secured to him by the Constitution and laws of the United States, to inform the proper officers of the United States of violations of the internal revenue laws, and to testify under and in obedience to such subpoenas, and to return to his home in peace and safety after so testifying, and to be secure, safe, and unmolested in his person and exempt from violence for having exercised and enjoyed those rights and privileges, and further averring that the defendants, in pursuance and prosecution of such conspiracy, assaulted and murdered him.

The defendants demurred to the indictment

"because there

Page 144 U. S. 311

are no such rights or privileges secured to the party conspired against, by the Constitution and laws of the United States as those set out in the indictment"

and "because, on the facts alleged in said indictment, there is no crime or offense set out of which the courts of the United States can take cognizance."

On October 5, 1891, the circuit court, held by MR. JUSTICE LAMAR and Judge Newman adjudged that the demurrer was well founded in law, and that it be sustained, and the indictment quashed. 48 F. 78.

This writ of error was thereupon sued out by the United States, and was allowed by the presiding justice. The defendants in error moved to dismiss the writ of error for want of jurisdiction.

Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.