A PRACTICAL ABRIDGMENT

OF

AMERICAN COMMON LAW CASES.

Endictment,

I. DEFINITION, p. 2.

II. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN INDICTMENT AND

A PRESENTMENT, p. 2.

III. OF THE OFFENCES WHICH ARE INDICTABLE, p. 3.

IV. OF THE OFFENCES WHICH ARE NOT INDICT-
ABLE, p. 8.

V. FINDING OF, BY THE GRAND JURY, p. 10.
VI. FORM OF.

(A) GENERAL REQUISITES, p. 11.

(B) INTENDMENT IN SUPPORT OF, p. 12.

(C) OF THE CAPTION, p. 12.

(D) AS TO THE STATEMENT OF TIME AND PLACE, p. 14. (E) RELATIVE TO THE SIGNING OF, BY THE FOREMAN OF THE GRAND JURY, p. 17.

(F) AS TO THE STATEMENT OF THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY STOLEN, p. 18.

(G) AS TO THE STATEMENT OF THE VALUE OF THE PRO-
PERTY STOLEN, p. 19.

(H) AS TO THE DESCRIPTION OF THE WOUND, p. 20.
(I) AS TO THE STATEMENT OF THE NAME OF THE PAR-
TY INDICTED, p. 21.

(J) AS TO THE STATEMENT OF THE NAME OF THE par-
TY AGAINST WHOM THE OFFENCE WAS COMMITTED,
p. 22.

(K) OF THE VENUE, p. 22.

VII. WHEN OBJECTIONS TO THE FORM AND SUFFICIENCY OF, MAY BE MADE, p. 22. 1

VOL. VI.

2

INDICTMENT-Difference between an indictment and presentment.

VIII. RELATIVE TO A VIEW, p. 23.

IX. JOINDER OF DISTINCT OFFENCES, AND OF
SEVERAL DEFENDANTS IN THE SAME IN-
DICTMENT, p. 24.

X. JOINDER OF DISTINCT OFFENCES IN THE
SAME COUNT, p. 26.

XI. PLEAS

(A) GUILTY, p. 26.

(B) IN BAR, p. 27.

(C) NOLO CONTENDERE, p. 30. XII. CONTINUANCE OF, p. 31. XIII. QUASHING OF, p. 32.

XIV. NOLLE PROSEQUI, p. 33.

XV. FOR AN OFFENCE BY STATUTE.

(A) WHAT THE INDICTMENT MUST SET FORTH, p. 34.

(B) AS TO THE CONCLUSION, p. 36.

(C) AS TO NEGATIVE AVERMENTS, p. 38.

XVI. OF THE EVIDENCE, p. 38.

XVII. WHEN AN INDICTMENT FOR ONE THING
WILL WARRANT A FINDING FOR ANOTH-
ER, p. 39.

XVIII. OF THE VERDICT, p. 39.

XIX. OF THE JUDGMENT, p. 40.

Definition.

The differ ence be

tween an in dictment

and a pre sentment.

I. DEFINITION.

STATE V. VINCENT. 1 N. Ca. Law Repository, 493. Taylor, C. J. An indictment is an accusation found by an inquest of twelve or more lawful jurors upon their oaths. The law has prescribed certain forms, in which such accusations shall be drawn, and will not allow any citizen to be punished unless such precision is observed.

II. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN INDICTMENT AND

A PRESENTMENT.

UNITED STATES v. MUNDEL, Nov. T. 1795, 6 Call's Va. Rep. p. 247.

Per Cur. Iredell, J. The latter was said to be a presentment merely, and not an indictment; but that is not strictly correct: For the difference between them is this. If the grand jury present of their own knowledge, it is a presentment only; but, if on the knowledge of others, it is an indictment.