In Re Wilson

Citations

• 140 U.S. 575
• 11 S. Ct. 870
• 35 L. Ed. 513
• 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2486

Syllabus

<p>Prior to 1885 the District Courts of a Territory had jurisdiction over the crime of murder, committed by any person other than an Indian, upon --an Indian reservation within its territorial limits; and such jurisdiction was not taken away by the act of March 3, 1885, c. 341, § 9, 23 Stat. 385.</p> <p>A deficiency in the number of grand jurors prescribed by law, there being present and acting a greater number than that requisite for the finding of an indictment, is not such a defect as vitiates the entire proceedings, and compels his discharge on habeas corpus, though unnoticed by the prisoner until after trial and sentence.</p> <p>If it be doubtful whether the defendant can, after trial and verdict, take advantage of such a defect by direct challenge, it is clear that the defect does not go to the jurisdiction, and cannot be taken advantage of by a collateral attack in habeas corpus.</p> <p>It is unnecessary to decide whether the “sixty days’” limitation of the sessions of the legislative assemblies of the Territories means a term of sixty calendar days.</p>