Case ID: vt_31/html/0602-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Aidis, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State of Vermont v. John Brown.
    
      Indictment.
    
    The omission by the foreman of a grand jury to add the word “forman” to his signature to the Words “ a true bill,” written by him bn an indictment found, does not invalidate the indictment.
    Indictment. The respondent moved to quash the indictment against him upon the ground that the word “foreman” was not annexed to the name of Ira Allen, whose name was indorsed by him on the bill under the words “a true bill.”
    It was admitted by the defendant, subject to its legal effect, that Ira Allen acted as foreman of the grand jury at the term of the court at which the indictment was found.
    
      The county court, — Bennett, J., presiding, — at the June Term, 1858, overruled the motion to quash the indictment, to which the respondent excepted,
    
      L. E. Chittenden, for the respondent.
    
      F. E. Woodbridge, State’s attorney, for the prosecution.
   Aidis, J.

The Compiled Statutes, chap. 35, § 16, provides that where twelve of the grand jury shall find a bill, the foreman shall write thereon “ a true bill.” In this case the foreman wrote “ a true bill, Ira Allen,” but omitted the word “foreman.”

We do not think the word foreman is required to be added to the signature of that officer’s name. The court appoint the fore-* man, and the appointment should in all cases be made a matter of record, so that an inspection of the records will always show who is the foreman.

No mischiefs are likely to ensue from omitting the word. The grand jury present their bills in open court, the court knows that they are presented by the foreman with the approval of the body of the jury, the clerk enters upon the back of the indictment a minute of its being duly presented and filed. These seem to us the sufficient safeguards, and to which the official signature of the foreman would add nothing.

As we understand the bill of exceptions, it appears that Ira Allen’s name “was indorsed by hint” on the indictment, and it is admitted he was the foreman.

The judgment of the county court is affirmed.