PARKINSON
v.
UNITED STATES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Richard B. Parkinson was prosecuted by information for fraudulently voting in a congressional election in Nevada, but the Supreme Court reversed his conviction because the alleged crime was punishable by imprisonment exceeding one year, making it an "infamous" crime under the Fifth Amendment that could only be prosecuted by grand jury indictment rather than by information. The Court held that crimes carrying potential imprisonment for more than one year must be charged by indictment, not information.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.
This case comes here on a certificate by the judges of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Nevada, that they were opposed in opinion on certain questions which arose at the hearing of a writ of error for the review of the rulings of the District Court of the district at the trial of Bichard B. Parkinson, on an information by the district attorney, for unlawfully, fraudulently,' and feloniously voting at an election for a representative in Congress from Nevada, and for unlawfully, fraudulently, and feloniously registering his name as an elector qualified to vote at such election. The prosecution was under §§ 5511 and 55Í2 of the Bevised Statutes, which made the offences charged punishable by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, or by imprisonment not more than three years, or both. As the imprisonmc ul may be “ for a period longer than one year,” the court can order that it shall be in the' penitentiary. Bev. Stat. $ 5541. This makes the crime “infamous,” within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and the prosecution should have been by indictment and not by infer mation. It was so decided by this court, after this case was certified up by tbe Circuit Court, in Ex parte Wilson, 114 U. S. 417, and Mackin v. United States, 117 U. S. 348. As the judgment of the District Court must be reversed for this cause; the questions certified have become immaterial, and their determination unnecessary in the final disposition of the case. We, therefore, remand the case without answering them. Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Medley, 134 U.S. 160 (U.S. 1890)…on the subject, the convict is transferred to a place where imprisonment always implies disgrace,- and which, as this court has judicially decided in Ex parte Wilson, 114 U. S. 417; Mackin v. United States, 117 U. S. 348; Parkinson v. United States, 121 U. S. 281; and United States v. De Walt, 128 U. S. 393, is itself an infamous punishment, and is there to be kept in “ solitary confinement,” the primary meaning of which phrase we have already explained. The qualifying phrase in this statute is but a- small…
-
In re Claasen, 140 U.S. 200 (U.S. 1891)…ishable by imprisonment for a term of years at hard labor is an infamous crime, .within the meaning of the Fifth .Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. See also Mackin v. United [*205] States, 117 U. S. 348; Parkinson v. United States, 121 U. S. 281; United States v. De Walt, 128 U. S. 393; Medley, Petitioner, 134 U. S. 160, 169; and In re Mills, 135 U. S. 263, 267. The purport of the rulings in those cases is, that a crime which is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison or penitentiary…
-
Brede v. Powers, 263 U.S. 4 (U.S. 1923)
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ex parte Wilson, 114 U.S. 417 (U.S. 1885)
- MacKin & Another v. United States, 117 U.S. 348 (U.S. 1886)