Brown v. Elliott - 225 U.S. 392 (1912)


U.S. Supreme Court

Brown v. Elliott, 225 U.S. 392 (1912)

Brown v. Elliott

Nos. 201, 202

Argued October 19, 1911

Reargued May 1, 1912

Decided June 10, 1912

225 U.S. 392

Syllabus

If the indictment under § 5440, Rev.Stat., sufficiently charges the commission of overt acts within the district, it is sufficient even if it states that the place where the conspiracy formed is unknown.

The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution does not preclude the place of trial of conspirators indicted under § 5440, Rev.Stat., being in any state where an overt act was performed. Hyde v. United States, ante, p. 225 U. S. 347.

A conspiracy entered into in violation of § 5440, Rev.Stat., may be a continuous crime, and, if it was designed to be, and was, continuous, every overt act was the act of all the conspirators by reason of the terms of their unlawful plot.

Where there are successive overt acts during the existence of the conspiracy, the period of limitation must be computed from the date of the last of them properly specified in the indictment, although some of them may have occurred more than three years before the indictment was found.

The Constitution of the United States is not intended as a facility for crime, but to prevent oppression; its letter and its spirit are satisfied if, where a criminal purpose is executed, that criminal purpose be punished. The criminal himself makes the venue of his trial.

The facts, which involve the validity of an indictment under § 5440 Rev.Stat., are stated in the opinion.

Page 225 U. S. 393



Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw 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.