Puslapio vaizdai
PDF
„ePub“

418. Inventory for the possessor of property taken. The judge or commissioner must thereupon, if required, deliver a copy of the inventory to the person from whose possession the property was taken and to the applicant for the warrant. Title XI, sec. 14, act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat. 229).

419. Written testimony concerning a search warrant.-If the grounds on which the warrant was issued be controverted, the judge or commissioner must proceed to take testimony in relation thereto, and the testimony of each witness must be reduced to writing and subscribed by each witness. Title XI, 8cc. 15, act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat. 229).

420. Property restored or retained.—If it appears that the property or paper taken is not the same as that described in the warrant or that there is no probable cause for believing the existence of the grounds on which the warrant was issued, the judge or commissioner must cause it to be restored to the person from whom it was taken; but if it appears that the property or paper taken is the same as that described in the warrant and that there is probable cause for believing the existence of the grounds on which the warrant was issued, then the judge or commissioner shall order the same retained in the custody of the person seizing it or to be otherwise disposed of according to law. Title XI, sec. 16, act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat. 229).

421. Filing search warrant and papers.-The judge or commissioner must annex the affidavits, search warrant, return, inventory, and evidence, and if he has not power to inquire into the offense in respect to which the warrant was issued he must at once file the same, together with a copy of the record of his proceedings, with the clerk of the court having power to so inquire. Title VI, sec. 17, act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat. 230).

422. Obstructing service of a search warrant.-Whoever shall knowingly and willfully obstruct, resist, or oppose any such officer or person in serving or attempting to serve or execute any such search warrant, or shall assault, beat, or wound any such officer or person, knowing him to be an officer or person so authorized, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than two years. Title XI, sec. 18, act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat. 230),

423. Perjury and subornation of perjury.-Sections one hundred and twentyfive and one hundred and twenty-six of the Criminal Code of the United States shall apply to and embrace all persons making oath or affirmation or procur ing the same under the provisions of this title, and such persons shall be subject to all the pains and penalties of said sections. Title XI, scc. 19, act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat. 230).

The above-named sections are found in 35 Stat. 1111, and define perjury and su'ornation of perjury, and fix the maximum punishment for each at five years' imprisonment and a fine of $2,000,

424. Maliciously procuring issue of a search warrant.-A person who mallclously and without probable cause procures a search warrant to be issued and executed shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year. Title X1, sec. 29, act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat, 239),

125. Authority exceeded by an officer in executing a search warrant.—An offcer who in executing a search warrant willfully exceeds his authority, or ever. cies it with unnecessary severity, shall be fined not more than $1000 or Imprisoned not more than one year. Title XI, sec. 21, act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat. 230).

426. Existing laws as to search warrants not impaired.-- Not) ing contained in this title shall be held to repeal or impair any existing provisions of Inw

regulating search and the issue of search warrants. Title XI, scc. 23, act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat. 230).

427. Commissioners of Federal courts.--The circuit courts of the United States and the district courts of the Territories, from time to time, shall increase the number of commissioners, so as to afford a speedy and convenient means for the arrest and examination of persons charged with the crimes referred to in the preceding section; and such commissioners are authorized and required to exercise all the powers and duties conferred on them herein with regard to such offenses in like manner as they are authorized by law to exercise with regard to other offenses against the laws of the United States. R. S. 1983.

Notes of Decisions.

Appointment of commissioners.-Appointment of commissioners is not authorized for the first time, but merely directed by this section, and hence the power to appoint

process servers must extend to all commissioners. In re Upchurch (C. C. 1889), 38 Fed. 25.

428. Execution of process by commissioners.-The commissioners authorized to be appointed by the preceding section are empowered, within their respective counties, to appoint, in writing, under their hands, one or more suitable persons, from time to time, who shall execute all such warrants or other process as the commissioners may issue in the lawful performance of their duties, and the persons so appointed shall have authority to summon and call to their aid the bystanders or posse comitatus of the proper county, or such portion of the land o naval forces of the United States, or of the militia, as may be necessary to the performance of the duty with which they are charged; and such warrants shall run and be executed anywhere in the State or Territory within which they are issued. R. S. 1984.

The Army is not to be used, as a posse comitatus or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except as expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress, by sec. 15, act of June 18, 1878, post 2812.

Obstructing the execution of process issued under the provisions of this section and the section next following was made punishable by R. S. 5516, incorporated in sec. 141, Criminal Code.

Notes of Decisions.

Appointment of commissioners.-The this section, extends to all commissioners. power to appoint process servers, given by In re Upchurch (C. C. 1889), 38 Fed. 25.

429. Execution of process by marshals.—Every marshal and deputy marshal shall obey and execute all warrants or other process, when directed to him, issued under the provisions hereof. R. S. 1985.

430. Fees for making arrest, etc.-Every person appointed to execute process under section nineteen hundred and eighty-four shall be entitled to a fee of five dollars for each party he may arrest and take before the commissioner, with such other fees as may be deemed reasonable by the commissioner for any additional services necessarily performed by him, such as attending at the examination, keeping the prisoner in custody, and providing him with food and lodging during his detention, and until the final determination of the commissioner; such fees to be made up in conformity with the fees usually charged by the officers of the courts of justice within the proper district or county, as near as may be practicable, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States on the certificate of the judge of the district within which the

arrest is made, and to be recoverable from the defendant as part of the judg ment in case of conviction. R. S. 1987.

431. Jurisdiction of the federal courts over crimes.-The crimes and offenses defined in this chapter shall be punished as herein prescribed:

First. When committed upon the high seas, or on any other waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State, or when committed within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State on board any vessel belonging in whole or in part to the United States or any citizen thereof, or to any corporation created by or under the laws of the United States, or of any State, Territory, or District thereof. Second. When committed upon any vessel registered, licensed, or enrolled under the laws of the United States, and being on a voyage upon the waters of any of the Great Lakes, namely: Lake Superior, Lake Michigan, Lake Huron, Lake Saint Clair, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, or any of the waters connecting any of said lakes, or upon the River Saint Lawrence where the same constitutes the International boundary line.

Third. When committed within or on any lands reserved or acquired for the exclusive use of the United States, and under the exclusive jurisdiction thereof, or any place purchased or otherwise acquired by the United States by consent of the legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of a fort, magazine, arsenal, dock-yard, or other needful building.

Fourth. On any island, rock, or key, containing deposits of guano, which may, at the discretion of the President, be considered as appertaining to the United States. Sec. 272, Criminal Code, act of March }, 1909 (35 Stat., 1142). The crimes here referred to are murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, larceny, etc.

Notes of Decisions.

with the consent of the State legislature, for the erection of a customhouse and other necessary public buildings, and so used. Sharon r. Hill (C. C. 1885), 24 Fed. 726.

Jurisdiction in general.-Paragraph 1 | California purchased by the United States, clearly includes murder committed on any land within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States and within any judicial district, as well as murder committed on the high seas. Jones c. U. S. (1890), 11 Sup. Ct. 80, 83, 137 U. S. 202, 34 L. Ed. C91

The mere fact that the executive department of the Federal Government took possession of San Juan Island, and excluded local officers appointed by the territorial Government from exercising their funetions there, did not displace the territorial jurisdiction, that by virtue of the organic act extended over it, but merely suspended the execution of the territorial laws for the time being therein. Watts r. United States (1870), 1 Wash. T. 288.

Where a State grants land to the General Government, reserving concurrent ju risdiction in executing process therein for offenses committed out of it, the Federal courts have exclusive Jurisdiction of of fenses committed within such territory. 1. 8. r. Travers (C C. 1814), Fed. Cas No. 16,537.

A United States court has exclusive ju risdiction of offenses committed in places in

[ocr errors]

The State courts can not take cognizance of offenses committed on territory within it belonging to the United States, over which Congress has exclusive power of legIstation. Id.

The United States courts have jurisdietion to try charges of crime committed on board any vessel belonging in whole or in part to the United States, or any citizen thereof, at any point on the high seas, or in any river, haven, creek, basin, or bay within the admiralty jurisdiction of the United States, and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State. I. S. r. Beyer (C. C. 1887), 31 Fed. 35.

Under Constitution, article 1, section 4, clause 17, giving the Congress power" to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over ⚫ all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the Sta in which the same shail be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock yards, and other needful buildings," such power extends to land purchased by

the United States, by consent of the legis lature of the State, and used for the public governmental purpose of maintaining thereon locks and dams for the improvement of the navigation of a river, and the United States has exclusive jurisdiction to prescribe and punish criminal offenses committed thereon; and the fact that the legislative consent was granted after the purchase is immaterial so far as relates to of fenses committed thereafter. U. S. v. Tucker (D. C. 1903), 122 Fed. 518.

The exclusive jurisdiction of the United States to prescribe and punish criminal offenses committed on land or in a "place occupied for governmental purposes may be derived either from article 1, section 8. of the Constitution, where the place was purchased by consent of the State legislature, or from an express cession of such jurisdiction by the legislature. Id.

Where both the acts of Congress and the State make a defined act an offense, the commission of the act may be an offense against each, and punishable by each. Sligh v. Kirkwood (Fla. 1913), 61 So. 185.

Where a State cedes to the United States exclusive jurisdiction over land purchased as a site for a public building, "for all purposes except the administration of the criminal laws of this State," the State has no jurisdiction for the punishment of crimes committed on the purchased land, but only the right to execute criminal process there for the violation of the laws of the State committed elsewhere within the State. State v. Mack (1897), 23 Nev. 359, 47 Pac. 763, 62 Am. St. Rep. 811.

Where an assault was committed on land purchased by the United States with the consent of the State of New Jersey, and jurisdiction of the State over such lands was vested in the United States by an act of the legislature and thereafter Congress passed an act for the punishment of such offense, it was the exercise of power conferred by Constitution, article 1, section 8, and is exclusive, and the State courts have no jurisdiction to try or punish such offense. State v. Morris (N. J. 1908), 68 A. 1103.

In 1869, San Juan Island, on the northwestern coast, was held in joint military occupancy by Great Britain and the United States. Held, that an offense committed there was not committed at a place within the sole and exclusive jurisdiction" of the United States, within the crimes acts of 1790, and that the territorial court had jurisdiction. Watts v. U. S. (1870). 1 Wash. T. 288; Same v. Territory (1872), 1 Wash, T. 409.

Question of law or fact.-Whether a homicide committed within the boundaries of a State constitutes an offense against the laws of the United States, of which a Federal

court has jurisdiction, depends on two questions: First, whether there has been such a ression by the State to the United States of the territory upon which the act alleged to constitute the crime was committed as to render such territory a "place or district of country under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States," within R. S., section 5339, which is a question of law for the court; and second, if such cession was made, whether the act was committed within the territory so ceded, which is a question of fact, to be submitted to the jury. U. S. v. Lewis (C. C. 1901), 111 Fed. 630.

High seas and other waters within admiralty and maritime jurisdiction.-Under act 1790, chapter 9, section 8, providing for the punishment of murder, etc., committed

upon the high seas, or any river, haven. basin, or bay, out of the jurisdiction of any particular State," it is not the offense, but the bay, etc., in which it is committed. that must be out of the jurisdiction of a State. U. S. v. Bevans (1818), 16 U. S. (3 Wheat. 336. 4 L. Ed. 404.

R. S. section 5372, does not confer on the Federal courts jurisdiction of a murder committed in the waters of a State where the tide ebbs and flows. Id.

The United States has no jurisdiction of the crime of manslaughter, committed on board an American ship in a tidal river within a foreign state. U. S. v. Wiltberger (1820), 18 U. S. (5 Wheat.) 76, 5 L. Ed. 37.

Under act April 30, 1790, providing for punishment of murder or robbery on the high seas, out of the jurisdiction of any State, United States courts have jurisdiction of such offenses, though they are not committed on board a vessel belonging to citizens of the United States, where the vessel did not belong to subjects of any foreign state. U. S. v. Holmes (1820), 18 U. S. (5 Wheat.) 412, 5 L. Ed. 122.

It makes no difference on the question of jurisdiction whether a crime committed on the high seas is committed on board a vessel or in the water. Id.

The courts of the United States had jurisdiction of murder or robbery committed on a vessel in possession of persons acknowledging obedience to no government or flag and acting in defiance of law, and a murder or robbery committed on the high seas may be cognizable by the courts of the United States, though committed on board a vessel not belonging to citizens of the United States, as if she had no national character, but was possessed and held by pirates or persons not lawfully sailing under the flag of any foreign nation. Id.

Where a murder or robbery is committed on board a foreign vessel by a citizen of

United States or on board a vessel of The Caited States by a foreigner, or by a n or foreigner on board a piratical 1, the offense is cognizable by the fts of the United States. Id.

An offense committed on board of a *.sical vessel, or in the sea, as by throwgdedent overboard, or drowning him,

ting him, or in the sea, though not wn overboard. is within the jurisdicfun of the United States. Id. One who, on a vessel owned by citizens

United States, committed on the seas the offense of assault with a danJules Weapon, and who was put in irons safe keeping, and who, on the arrival of the vessel at the lower quarantine in the est district of New York, was delivered s of the State of New York, and was by them carried into the southern 4tret and there delivered to the marshal the United States for that district, to A warrant to apprehend and bring h to justice was first issued, was triable

th. southern district. U. S. v. Arwo, 41873, 19 Wall. 486, 490, 22 L. Ed. 67. A murder committed on board a ship lying in the harbor of Honolulu is cognizable te the district court of the United States for the Territory of Hawaii, under R. S. Ben 5339, as committed in a haven or

of the sea within the admiralty and La.. me jurisdiction of the United States, and out of the jurisdiction of any partr State." Wynne r. U. S. (1910),

Sup. Ct. 447, 449, 217 U. S. 234, 54 L Rd 748.

There is nothing in the Hawaiian oract of Apr. 30, 1900 (31 Stat. 141) expressly or impliedly deprives the

[ocr errors]

1-deral courts of their jurisdiction under 8. section 5339, to punish a murder fitted on board a ship lying in the or of Honolulu. Id.

Th waters inclosed between the shore s: the Government breakwaters in Lake Fat the port of Buffalo, without as well

[ocr errors]

#thin the line designated on the GovLht chart as "Buffalo harbor line," tiate a haven" and not "high seas," in assault with a dangerous weapon ***ätted on a vessel belonging to the Τ d States or citizens thereof anchored b waters is within the State, and not the Federal, jurisdiction. Ex parte O'Hare 1919), 179 Fed. 662, 103 C. C. A. 220, res ring order (D. C. 1909), 171 Fed. 290. To give the Federal courts jurisdiction Ta murder, as having been committed in the high seas, the death, as well as the Leal stroke, must have happened on the T. S. r. McGill (C. C. 1806), Cas. No. 15,676.

Ilah seas," within act Apr. 30, 1790, char 9, section 8, means any waters on

the sea coast which are without the bounda ries of low-water mark. U. S. v. Ross (C. C. 1813), Fed. Cas. No. 16,196.

The part of the sea below low-water mark, and not within the body of any country, is the "high seas" within the act of 1789, sec. 9. The Abby (C. C. 1818), Fed. Cas. No. 14; Gedney v. L'Amistad (D. C. 1840), Fed. Cas. No. 5,294a; Johnson r. Twenty-one Bales, etc. (C. C. 1814), Fed. Cas. No. 7,417; The Martha Anne (D. C. 1843), Fed. Cas. No. 9,146; Thackarey r. The Farmer of Salem (D. C. 1835), Fed. Cas. No. 13,852; U. S. v. The Julia Lawrence (D. C. 1871), Fed. Cas, No. 15.502.

A vessel lying on the sea outside o. the bar of a harbor of the United States within 3 miles of the shore, is on the high seas. U. S. v. Smith (C. C. 1816), Fed. Cas. No. 16,337.

An offense committed in a bay which is entirely landlocked and inclosed by reefs is not committed on the high seas, within act March 26, 1804, chapter 40. U. S. v. Robinson (C. C. 1826), Fed. Cas. No. 16,176.

The words "high seas," in act 1825, chapter 276, section 22, mean the uninclosed waters of the ocean on the sea coast. outside of the fauces terræ. U. S. v. Grush (C. C. 1829), Fed. Cas. No. 15.268, overruling U. S. v. Bevans (C. C. 1816), Fed. Cas. No. 14,589.

Where such arm of the sea, creek, haven, etc., is so narrow that a person standing on one shore can reasonably discern and distinctly see by the naked eye what is doing on the opposite shore, the waters are within the body of a county. Id.

State courts have exclusive jurisdiction of offenses committed on arms of the sea, creeks, havens, basins, and bays within the bb and flow of the tide within the body of a county. Id.

Act 1790, chapter 9, section 8, as well as act 1820, chapter 113 applies to all mur ders and robberies committed on board of or upon American ships on the high seas. U. S. v. Gibert (C. C. 1834), Fed. Cas. No. 15,204.

In the case of a homicide by shooting, the place where the shot takes effect, and not that from which it is fired, determines the jurisdiction of the offense, and where a shot from an American vessel in a foreign harbor kills a person on board of a foreign vessel lying in such harbor, the jurisdiction of the offense belongs to the foreign gov ernment, and not to the courts of the United States, under act 1790, chapter 36, section 12. U. S. e. Davis (C. C. 1837), Fed. Cas. No. 11,932.

To render a vessel American, so as to punish off nses on board of her, it is enough to show that she sailed from and to an American port, and was apparently owned

« AnkstesnisTęsti »