The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-11-25

prn
cipa before
crime Such pleading the principles
criminal pleading and practice independent Of statutory authority
Where is charged Indictment principal and
is of
principal.
of
the verdict of jury where it is supported by the evidence
OPINION OF THE COURT BY \. $. HUMPHREYS ESQ
The defendant Geo H. uttmm tried and convicted
principal the July the Circuit of
Fourth Circuit holden Ionokaa, under Indictment chore
ing him principal in attempting murder the newborn child
Of his wife Pauline Ruttann also charging him accessory
Pauline Runann am attempt by her to
murder hers said newborn child.
Several exceptions reserved by the defendant the r
ngs of the trial court but upon the submission of the in
this all OF the exceptions waived those
sdered.
The first exception is to the order of the court overriding de
PENDANTS motion quash the Indictment he averrng that
charged him with separate and distinct oense prn-
cipa and accessory before the fact.
This motion properly overrued. The onder of the
charging the defendant principal and be
fore the fact simply designed and calculated to adapt the
pleading the different aspects in which the evidence the
trial might present single transaction Section 62S of the
gives express authority join the principal
before in the Indictment
Such the decision of this Rcr Wo Sooc Haw
734. And discover any sound against char
ing the principal and accessory before after
the fact in the Indictment Such pleading finds support
in the general principles of criminal pleading and practice indie
pedent of statutory license Dr. Wharton in his work Grim
Pldg 18th Ed, says that offenses though
differing from each other and varying in the punishment author
inflicted for their preparation may be included in the
Indictment and the accused tried upon the several charges
the time, provided the ofenes be of the general
and provided the mode of trial be the same
SpeC Cor tate & Rem X. 1rDlSt 4
w Rep. s64; U. DcEerson, Me- Lean 1885, state
Crank, Bailey &C. 6. c. % Am Dec, 10.
IF there any doubt whether particular defendant
principal accessory Indictment should charge both
forms of guilt in separate counts
McCan Grim. 212; and authorities there cited
/ Eish. New Grim Proceed See 449
The second exception the order of the court overriding
defendants his discharge made before pleading to the
This based upon the record and files of
Republic of Ha,caj Pauline Ru
which appears that Pauline Rutmann indicted
principal charged with attempt to murder her newborn
child and that she tried and acquitted of such ofense
If the defendant had been charged solely accessory before
the fact convicted under the charging him such
accessory would be called upon determine whether under
(Secs and Penal Laws 1890 he entitled
his discharge not his alleged principal having been acqut
ted But question subject for consideration,
the defendant having been convicted under the count in the in
dctment charging him principal The count charging him
be accessory before the may be rejected urPusage
l Nc. Claim Grim. Law 212
The defendant was immune from prosecution prnci-
pal because other person charged with the crime had
been acquitted
We find in the order the refusing to discharge
the defendant.
The remaining exception the verdict of the jury being
contrary the law and the evidence and against the weight of
evidence careful consideration of the evidence has salts
fec us that was sufficient support the verdict
contrary to the law
exceptions overrued and the of the lower
is affirmed.
Deputy Attorncy-Gcpcdt f. p. Dole for prosecution
Wilder Wise and Wakefield and Paul Neunann for defend