Blitz v. United States
Citations
- 153 U.S. 308
- 14 S. Ct. 924
- 38 L. Ed. 725
- 1894 U.S. LEXIS 2185
Syllabus
<p>B. having been indicted under Rev. Stat. § 5511 for voting more than once ' at the same election for a Representative in .Congress, a special deputy of the marshal swore at the trial that he saw B. vote twicé at the poll. On cross-examination he was asked why he did not arrest B. when he saw that he had thus voted. The question, being objected to, was excluded. Held, that it was irrelevant and was properly excluded.</p> <p>The refusal by a Federal court to grant a new trial cannot be reviewed on a writ of error.</p> <p>An indictment, under Rev. Stat. § 5511 for knowingly personating and voting under the name of another at an election at which a Representative in Congress and also state officers were to be elected, is fatally defective if it fails to clearly charge that the accused so voted for a Representative in Congress.</p> <p>A count in an indictment under that section which charges that the defendant did then and there unlawfully, knowingly, and feloniously vote at said election for a candidate for the same office for Representative in the Congress of the United States, more than once, describes the offence with sufficient certainty, and the election at which it took place sufficiently by such reference to the date of it named in a previous count in the indictment.</p> <p>The indictment in this case contained three counts, specifying three separate offences against Rev. Stat. § 5511. The defendant was convicted of all. A motion in arrest of judgment under the second count being entertained, he was sentenced, under the first conviction, to imprisonment for a term commencing on a day named, and under the third conviction to a further term, commencing on the expiration of the first term.</p> <p>This court, holding the first count in the indictment to be fatally defective, and sustaining the arrest of judgment under the second count, directs that the term of imprisonment under the third count shall be held to commence on the day named for the commencement of til
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding that upon reversal of the first count, the 23 Nos. 2017AP2440-CR & 2017AP2441-CR sentence on the remaining count commenced on the date fixed for imprisonment on the first count
- \The overruling of the motion for new trial is next assigned for error. We had supposed that it was well understood by the bar that the refusal of a court of the United States to grant a new trial cannot be reviewed upon writ of error.\ (citing cases)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Harlan
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.