Case Name: PEOPLE v. COLBY
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1879
Citations: 54 Cal. 37
Docket Number: No. 10,444
Parties: PEOPLE v. COLBY.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Reports
Volume: 54
Pages: 37–41

Head Matter:
[No. 10,444.]
PEOPLE v. COLBY.
Ceiminal Law—Indictment.—A motion to set aside an indictment can lie based only upon one of the grounds enumerated in sec. 995, Penal Code. The clause in subd. 1 of that section, that an indictment must be set aside “ when not found as prescribed in this Code,” means simply that it must be concurred in by the constitutional number, twelve, as provided in sec. 940; and will not support a motion to set the indictment aside on the grounds that the grand jury was not properly selected, summoned, or impanneled.
Same—Geand Juey.—Wallace, C. J., dissenting: Where some of the persons summoned on a grand jury are successfully challenged by the defendant, the remaining grand jurors, if of the requisite number, by the operation of the statute constitute the grand jury, to whom the charge against the defendant must be submitted; and the court has no authority to form a special grand jury for the case by impanneling others in place of those who were challenged.
Same—Indictment.—Wallace, C. J., dissenting: If an indictment be found by such a grand jury, it should be set aside on the grounds specified in the first and third subdivisions of see. 940, Penal Code; that is to say, both because not found as prescribed in this Code, and because unauthorized persons were present during the session of the grand jury.
Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, upon an indictment for murder in the Twentieth District Court, County of Santa Cruz. The facts are stated in the opinion.

Opinion:
By the Court.
We think the petition for a rehearing should be denied; but as certain questions are considered and apparently decided in the former opinion herein, the determination of which is not absolutely required by the exigencies of the case, that opinion is so far modified as to make the judgment depend exclusively upon our affirmance of the rule as laid down in People v. Southwell, (46 Cal. 142) viz., that a motion to set aside an indictment can only be based upon the grounds enumerated in sec. 995 of the Penal Code, and that the clause that an indictment .shall be set aside where not found as prescribed in the Code will not support a motion to set aside an indictment on the ground that the grand jury was not properly selected, summoned, or impanneled.
The first subdivision of sec. 995 of the Penal Code provides that an indictment must be set aside " where it is not found, indorsed, or presented as prescribed in this Code." Sec. 940 provides how an indictment must be found—that is, that it must be concurred in by the constitutional number—twelve. The last mentioned section and 941 and 944 prescribe how an indictment must be indorsed and presented. The first subdivision of sec. 995 by its terms refers to the portions of the Code which prescribe the mode of finding, indorsing, and presenting an indictment. It is equally plain that the third subdivision of the same section cannot be made to refer to those persons " present during the session " who themselves constitute the grand jury impanneled and sworn under the direction of the Court.
Rehearing denied.