People v. Southwell

Citations

• 46 Cal. 141

Syllabus

<p>Challenge to Panel of Grand Jury. — Where S., who had been indicted for a criminal offense, but was not held to answer prior to the finding of the indictment, on his arraignment moved to set aside the indictment, on the ground of irregularities in selecting, summoning, and impaneling the Grand Jury: held, that the motion was in effect a challenge to the panel.</p> <p>Idem. — It is competent for the Legislature to restrict the grounds of the challenge to the panel of the Grand Jury.</p> <p>Hule of Construction. — A estatute must be so construed, if practicable, as to give effect to every part of it, and so as to reconcile apparent inconsistencies, if it can be done without torturing the language.</p> <p>Grounds of Challenge to Panel of Grand Jury. — It was intended by section one hundred and eighty-two of the Practice Act to restrict the right of challenge to the panel of the Grand Jury to the three grounds therein enumerated.</p> <p>Motion to Set Aside an Indictment. — The grounds for setting aside an indictment, enumerated in section two hundred and seventy-eight of the Practice Act, are irregularities in the proceedings of the Grand Jury after it has been organized; and the„clause providing that the indictment shall be set aside where not found as prescribed in the Act, will not support a motion to set aside an indictment, on the ground that the Grand Jury was not properly selected, summoned, or impaneled.</p> <p>Idem. — Irregularities in Grand Jury. — Under section two hundred and seventy-eight the motion to set aside the indictment is addressed to irregularities in the proceedings of a valid Grand Jury, and not to irregularities in its formation.</p> <p>Error in Serving Venire of Grand Jury. — A Grand Jury summoned in pursuance of a venire duly issued, is not illegal merely because the Court erroneously directed the venire to be served by the Coroner instead of the Sheriif.</p>