Case ID: va_4/html/0183-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Commonwealth v. Joseph Cohen.
    Criminal Law — Failure to Examine by Proper Court— Arrest of Judgment. — After a verdict convicting' a prisoner of a Felony, a plea in arrest of judgment, that he has not been examined for the offence by a Court of competent jurisdiction, (alleging that the Corporation Court, by which he was examined, has no criminal jurisdiction,) ought to be overruled; because the said plea suggests matter making no part of the record, but matter which, if true, is proper for a plea in abatement, or for a motion to quash the Indictment.
    
      
       Criminal Law — Failure to Examine Prisoner by Proper Court — Arrest ot Judgment. — For the proposition that, after a verdict convicting the prisoner of alfelony, a plea in arrest of judgment, that he has not been examined for the offence by a court of competent jurisdiction, ought to be overruled; because the plea suggests matter making no part of the record, but matter which, if true, is proper for a plea in abatement, or for motion to quash the indictment, the principal case is cited and followed in Angel v. Com., 2 Va. Cas. 233; Campbell v. Com., 2 Va. Cas. 316; Morris v. Com., 9 Leigh 636; State v. Stewart, 7 W. Va. 734. holding that it is too late after verdict of guilty and judgment, to claim in the appellate conrt, for the first time, the right to such examination, and to claim that the judgment of the lower court should be reversed, and the verdict set aside.
      In Mowbray v. Com., 11 Leigh 646, it is said the three counts being improperly contained in the indictment the motion of the prisoner’s counsel to quash each one of them was legal and in order, Com. v. Gohen, 2 Va. Gas. 158. and ought to have been sustained. The ruling of the principal case is approved in Com. v. Cawood, 2 Va. Cas. 544, but this case is distinguished on the ground that the motion was made before verdict. See also, Burgess v. Com., 2 Va. Cas. 483.
      See, citing the principal case, Buskirk v. Judge, 7 W. Va. 103; foot-note to McCauls’ Case, 1 Va. Cas. 271.
    
   The prisoner was indicted, tried, and convicted, at the Superior Court of Law for Campbell county, of murder in the second degree, of a slave: after the verdict, he offered the following plea in arrest of judgment : “ The prisoner, in his proper person, comes and prays the Court that judgment on the verdict aforesaid may not be entered up, but that the same may be stayed and arrested, for the following reasons, to wit: That he has not had, as by Law he ought to have had, a new trial for the offence charged in the ^Indictment, by a Court of Examination possessing- jurisdiction of the said offence, as the Corporation Court of Lynchburg, in which he was examined, has not, by the Act of Incorporation, jurisdiction in Criminal Cases; particularly of the offence charged in the Indictment, nor has the said Corporation Court jurisdiction of the said Case, by any Law prior or subsequent to the said Act of Incorporation.” The Superior Court adjourned the following questions to this Court. 1. Has the Corporation Court of Lynchburg jurisdiction to hear and examine, as County Courts have, cases of felony committed within the jurisdiction and limits of said Corporation ? 2. If. not, what further proceedings ought to be had in this Court respecting, the prisoner ?”

The General Court did not decide the question made in the Court below, but entered the following judgment:

“This Court is unanimously of opinion, that the plea of errors in arrest of judgment, is not sufficient to arrest said judgment, inasmuch as it suggests matter making no part of the record, but matter which, if true, is proper for a plea'in abatement, or for a motion to quash the Indictment, and therefore the questions propounded do not arise, and ■ of course are pot decided; which is ordered to be certified. ”