Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges

UNITED STATES v. HAMILTON.

Practice This court will not take cognizance of a division of opinion between the judges of a circuit court on a motion to quash an indictment.

MR. JUSTICE BRADLEY delivered the opinion of the court.

The certificate of division in this case was made on a division in opinion between the judges on a motion to quash the indictment. As a motion to quash is always addressed to the discretion of the court, a decision upon it is not error, and cannot be reviewed on a writ of error. In the case of United States v. Rosenburgh, 7 Wall. 580, we decided the precise point, that this court cannot take cognizance of a division of opinion between the judges of a circuit court upon a motion to quash an indictment. This decision was re-affirmed in United States v. Avery, 13 Wall. 251, and in United States v. Canda, decided at October term 1881.

The case, not being properly before us, is dismissed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

UNITED STATES v. HAMILTON
(Oct 15, 1883)