United States v. Pridgeon

Citations

• 153 U.S. 48
• 14 S. Ct. 746
• 38 L. Ed. 631
• 1894 U.S. LEXIS 2163

Syllabus

<p>On November 12, .1890, In the Indian country, within the boundaries of Oklahoma Territory, as defined by the act of May 2, 1890, c. 182, 26 Stat. 81,- horse stealing was not a crime against the' United States, punishable under the act of February 15, 1888, c. 10, 25 Stat. 33; but as to the Cherokee outlet, it remained Indian country after the passage of the Act of May 2, 1890, and such an offence, committed there, continued to be an offence against the United States.</p> <p>An indictment in the District Court of the United States within and for Logan County in Oklahoma Territory, and for the Indian country attached thereto, charging the commission of the offence of horse stealing in November, 1890, and laying the venue of the offence “ at and within that part of the Territory of Oklahoma attached for judicial purposes to Logan County,” with a description of territory .which included part of Oklahoma and part of the Cherokee Outlet not in Oklahoma, and which averred the same to be “ then and there Indian country, and a place then and there under the sole and exclusive jurisdiction of the United States of America,” will not be held to be fatally defective when attacked collaterally by writ of habeas corpus.</p> <p>Under a writ of habeas corpus the inquiry is not addressed to errors, but to the question whether the proceedings and judgment are nullities; and unless it appears that the judgment or sentence under which the prisoner .is confined is void, he is not entitled to his discharge.</p> <p>Where a court has jurisdiction of the person and the offence, the imposition of a sentence in excess of what the law permits, does not render the legal or authorized portion of the sentence void, but only leaves such part of it as may be in excess open to question and attack.</p> <p>In accordance with this principle the court answers the third question certified in the negative, without expressing an opinion as to what would have been the proper action of the Circuit Court in