Knewel v. Egan Court Opinion

    ( "L7 @c r off-,^. ry?j!?:;ffi,
-supRElrE couRr oF rEE uMTED srafus.@dr. H ca

Slat^ers^v..Yalante,26_{ U. S,5Q,68 L.rState v. Cole, 31 ldabo, 603, 17{ pac.
ed. 850, {-1^!r_9. Ct._Rep-^4_11 ; Frank 

-v-.t13t; People v. Webber, igg Cat. OZl, eO

!Iangqm,_z37 U_. !.309,59 L. ed.969,35rPac. 38, 11 Am. Crim.'Rep. 112; Siati
Srrp. Ct. Rep. 53!. 'v. -\[ahone.v, 115 ]Ie. gb1,'98 ,Ltt. ;;O:

Assuming that the information was People v. parks, 44 Cal.'105; State ii
not absolutcly void,, any determination I Beesskovb, 34 }Iont. 41, 8b pae. j?S{
that this court might malie as to the' l{cCoy v. State, 22 Neb.' 418, 35 N. W.
ellect of evidence pres_ented to it would 202; Gaweka v. State, g1 \f;b.53, 1.12
not.be void, blt woulcl be conclusive aslX. W.287; People v. iraig,59 Cal.'3?01
against a collateral attack by habeas I People v. \Yon! Wang, 9I' Cal. 2i7, 2licorpus. iPae.271; Territory v. Do,1.\ri2.507,
_1q C.J.718; Re Ilaskell,52 Fed.795;i25 Pac. 472t Knight u. State, i-t Ohio
$ar!a1-v-. llcGourinr 2!S U. S. 442, 51lSt. 365, 43 N. E: 99S; peopie ex rcl.

142,443

645. lthe information.
The substitutioa of the sherifr as ap-

-ll.arlan 
v. .i\rcuourrnl 215 U. S. +42, b4iSt. 3ti5, 43 N. E. 995; people ex rcl.

L. ed. !01 31 Sup. Ct. Rep.44,21 Ann. lstevenson v. Iliggius, f5 nt. ifOl peoplc
Cas.849; Ri{fle v.-Dyche, ?62y. S.333,1v. \Yakao, ffi e;1. App. 4b1, iOS pic.
67 L. eil._1009,43-Sup. Ct. Rcp. 555;1721; Ex parte Slater,'?Z Uo. lOZ.
State v. Egan, - S.D. -, 195 N. W. l And it-must be proved as allegetl il

\Ya-ll v. State, 5 Ga. App. 305, 63 S. E.
pellant shoulil be made.llant should be made. | 27; Re Kelly. 46 Fed. 653; State v.

Thompson v. Ilnited Sist€s, 103 U. S.l Sehneiders. Z5g Mo. 319. 168 S. W. COf ;

27; Re Kelly, 46 Fed. 653; State v.
Schneiders, 259 IIo. 319, 168 S. IY. 60{;

*89.^ae, 29 L. :9.- 52r-., 523; t C.- .I-: 1_19 | State v. \vheaton, 79 Kan. b21, 99 pre.
$ 230; Gorham Mfg. Co. v. Wendell,261 l1133; people v. blummenbers.'271 Ill.

vaL, ae!, r v. vr arvrl a[ale v. t
$ 230; Gorhq }-tfq. 9o. v. Wendell, 261ltta3; peog 23_0; Gorham Mfg. Co. v. Wendell.261 i1133; people v. i3lummenberg, 2Zl Ill.
g-.^S._1, pZ L.gd..5-05,^4_3- Q_up.C_t,R.p-ltgO, irO N'. E. 290; people v."Farks, {{^U_.-S._1,, 

p7 L. gd.. 505, 
^4_3^ t_rp. Clr 

-Rep. l 190, 110 N-. E. 290; people v. parks, {{
313;-Irwin y: T.ig{r !18 U:^q. 2_19, q6lCat. rOO; Ex parre Slatlr, ?2 Uo. 102-;
L. ed.-573, a! Sup.9.E"p, 2_93; People jStot" 

". 
Crowley, Z0 S. D.611, 108 N.lY.

er rel. Reeder v. Wexford Countv, 37 I lOf ,

Mich.351 ; Stone v. Bell,-35 Nev.2{0, 1 8"b.". corpus was and is the only
129 !ac. 458; -Otto Eardwar.e-^Co. v. lremedy op.o 'io the plaintiff.
4^o-1m!e1s, 36 Ctt $pp. 402,^t79^^pry.1 M;o;"'r. Ou.pr.y,261 U. S. s6,6I
!221_Johlso_n v.-Wells,T. & Co.239 U.lL. ed.;+9, +a $p. ii. Rep.265; rl:,lrn
S, 294, 60 L. err. 243;'86 s,p. ct. n.p 

I ;j it;d;il1,- ;i5 ;:'s^:"iii,:i l;_;:
62; Simmons-1._Glorgia_Jlon & Coal_Co.lrior,31 Supl Ct. Rep. {{,21 Ann. Cos.
117-Ga.305,61 LR.A. i39,4g S. E.780-ls+s;'nipuii. Si.uor[, 100 U. S.3i1,?I

The state is an interested party 
""a li. .a."ziil ril Nil;;;] iii U: 5. isr, $

should properly be hearil. I L. .a. ffS.'S Suo. Ct. t[eo. 672; Re Snor,should prop-erly_ be heard. I l. .a. ttS, g Sup. Ct. I[ep. 672; Re Snor,
.-_Stat^e v. Gordon, 108 Miss. ry,q? So.lrzo ri-S.'zti,io i. .al osa, z Qrp, *431: _State er rel. Ke.y_es 

^v^.^ 
Buckham, lRep. bS6; Ei p.rte Royall, 1lZ q.. S.431:_State er rel. Ke.v_es 

^v^.^ 
Buckham, lnlp.-SSO; n; p;rt" Royall, lt7 q.. S.

29 }finn. i162, t3 N. P^902.; Burr o.l:+i,29 L.'ed. aO'a, O Sup.'Cr.'Rep.73{.
Foster,. 132,A1a. 41, 31 ,!or495; Statel ii i. the duty of Uoit"a States eouru
v. Davi_s, 156 Ala. 181,J1!:.-t^A!r n.xlto in*Jgut. io.idoor.

?iii*}1'li?il;"ll.i'l3i,iif',,."*"u'i l ";';li,*';i?.'+'",'r,!;,1, 
,Ti3$

lllr,\;'ff:,.?i.:#;;- Jf* $i;I^),".; i;d;; 
y;biy;#'."r.i,.i isi FLa. e5'

.r.u*o, 10 -q.rn.. urlm._ t(ep.- JJz; -Ejdmonson 
I

i;"liTr?#f lrl ll?#:l' i 
-fi 

"I:I I, ^.y 
.^r r.,,*'::.lp"o crerivere tr the o p i o'

I_e_pp, p. q. zsof qdlli:,:"I tli,,^-l'"rr"j :*.TH:; here on appear rroo

B,iBt"t-+1*::l,ii."$::i:J6-T"fill::liiq:i, j:rh%"T#,*:#*i
L. ed. 616, 40 Sup. ct. Rep. 347. 

I iftsl ", 
-oia-.. -"rd jrag*.nr. ot', that

Mr. George W. Egau argueil the cause i ;;r.t t, writ of habeas corpus, disch.irrg'
and filed a brief for appellee, pro se: I ing the appellee frtm the_.custotty o-t^.:::

In order to jiue 1r,e;;;;Jr;i;ai.iion lap-p"tlant^is sheriff of Minnebaha coua'

of the alleged olfense, the law is well I ty, South Dakota.
settled tha[ it is absolutely neeessary | 

- 
Appellee was eharged, on !nformaLt€

that the venue must be alleged in the I bv the state's attorney of tltat t'1111:::

information, and that it cannot be in- | with the presentation of a false insur'
rerrerl. "" '^' 

l,;;;; ;i;i,i'i;"i,"riiii"r-,t S +:zt-"r tu'
State v. \Yilliams, 4 Inil. 23{, 58 Am. ln.''i..,f-d"a. of 

-is19 
ot Sluth Dakotr

Dec. 627; Freeman v. State.'88 Ter.IH" *". convicted of violation 'I-:l;ucv. waa, t lEEu4u v- dL6Lc. oo h45 gurtvtult

C.rim. Rei. 53,221 S. W. 1087; United l.tatute, after trial by jur.v, io !h^i^-*'15
States v.'Christopherson, 26f F;d. 225;lDakota circuit courf io yar'rtsj06.sil

KI{EV

ras seatcneed to ser-vc a teru in
Jtiie-oenitentiarY. On aPPeal to
;;.d" eourt of-the st-ate, judgment

il'"ri*io" was vaeated and new t
ffi;;-d-. 

- State v. Egan, 44 S' D' :

rae N. W. 652.--Er"o was again brought ^to trial
tlf?*" .Urrg"e in APrit, 1C22' and,
seain found guiltY, and sentenceo

;;;; ;1;; in tlie state Penitenti-U-ooo 

"PP""t 
to the suPreme court

thi stafe, the judgment of convtc

;;;ffi;.d. St.i" v. Egan, 47 s'

1. 195 N. w. Gt2.-'g"for. tbe distriet court, the appt

ureed. as he urges here, two Prtnc
;;;;;h" for grairting the writ; nar
fi;;lh; lnloimatiori-on which the

ui.tlo" ,r". had ditl not describe a
Iic offense; that in it no venue was

"na 
tttut, io .on="q'"n"e, the trial c

*"" 
-*itnoot jurisdiction in the c-:"3..[ioo-+z7i of the Revised Cod

Sorit 
--b1f.ota, 

under which the.
;t,;i;; -*"i uua, so far as Pertir
reads as follows:

"Every person who-presents-or et

to be presented anv false or fraud'
;i"i;,';;-;;y p'odt in suPPort^o!
such elaim, upon anY contract ot I

""." io. ttre PaYment of anY loss' . '
i.- orni.rrurrti 6Y imPrisonme-nt ir
sta[e penitentiarY not exceedtng
;;;;..'or bv 6ne not exceeding
in-o"trnd doliars, or both'"--il. 

info..ation chargecl in subs

tnJine Firemen's Insurance Con
f .t*Li"tion of Newark, New J
*t -J.**.red to do business i:

state oi South [4{4] Dakota' ar

Dursuance of this authorityt lnsure'
irin oroP"rtv of Petitioner' locat
Min".t uir" c6unty;- that the propert
a*i..".a bY firl, anil that ther'
iliti;;;; presentid a false elaim
'"iltii.l *,i tansuage of the info-rn
b:i;;; "';oa 

th"at iherearter and .
.u""? tn.ltn daY of January-, 192

."id d.f.ndrnt, George W' Ega.1

antl there did wilfulll-' unlawfull;
feloniorrslv Present nnd eause

r""=".i.d'tr' F. c. \Yhitehouse &

nanv. *lro were at that time act
ih" 

"s"nts 
for the Firemen's Ins

C-o-*iln, of Newark. New Jer
f"l.; ;n'd fraudulent claim and Pr

suorxrrt o[ sueh claim."--h'ir" .i..rit court o[ ]linnehaha
tY. in wbich aPPellee's trial an

viction were had, bY the Provrsr
the Constitution of South Dakota
;J. ;) ;;e ihe Reviseil code of
Dal<ota 1919. S 4653, is given- c

jo.itai.tioo of all actions and
30 tJ. ed.



ITDD STATES. lgu. KNEWEL v. EGAN. t13-{45

viction was had did not tlescribe a pub- | stance thet the issue of fact in any
lic offense; that in it no venue was laid,lcriminal case can only be tried in the

'. Cole, 31 [daho. 608.
rople v. Webber, iffi Cri'.1.Pi.,
, 1{ Am, Crim. Rep. f {2;Xi.i:
onn', 115 IIe. 251,'gg A l l ?in .

v. P_arks,_ 44 Cal. 
'r05.-,{i;t;"'r.:

,ve,3{ I\Iont.4l, m pae. i;|.v. State, 22 Neb.'af S, g5'X.'\i'
l:.kt o.-State, 9{ l(eb. Si,' :q':

f: f i:;f; tg' 3i,:al,'ili

li#H*ur*;:*:+l
""'", " #'ggi :'i il.'l "il,rtl.i*ir parte Slater, 72 Mo. l0Z.it must be proved as alleged iqruation.
v. State, 5 Ga. App. 305, 63 g. B.K"ll]'. 3-0 Fed. ^G53; 'Stuti'i.

I fr ,3XlJiif ?;ilifi, E $,"1:
'e-<.r_ple v. Blummenberg,' 271 I-ll.
: \.E. 790; People r."Frrk.. ;ii; Ex-palte- Slqller, ZZ llo. iOi:
Crosley, 20 S. D. 011, 108 N:Il.:

rs corpus -was and is the oaly
open Co the plaintifr.
1^v..^Dgmpsey, 201 U. S. 56, 6?
13,43 Sup. Ct. Rep. 265; Hailan
rurin, 218 U. S. 412, 54 L. ed.

Sup. Ct. Rep. 44, 21 Ann. Cos.pate S_iebold, 100 U. S. AZ1, Zs
[7; R_e Nie-lsen_, 131 U. S. 181; 3A

-4 9_!op. C_t. R_ep. 672; Re Sno*,
\.2!4,30 L. ed. 658, ? Sup. Cr.
5; Ex parte Ro-vall, 117 U. S.
,. ed. 868, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep.7B4.
be tluty of United States courtr
ligate questions.
v. Lewis, 166 C. C. A.2Tg, Z5l
; Ex parte Van }foore,22l Fed.
ryosan v. Luce, 291 Fed.425.

rstiee Stone ilelivered the opio-
be court:
ase eomes here on appeal from-ict court of the United Statca
ilistrict of South Dakota frou
,n order ancl judgment of tbat
writ of habeas corpus, cliscbarg-
Lppellee from the custod-v of thc
;. as sherifr of Mi.nnehaha coun.
r Dakota.
ee rras eharged, on information
tate's attorney of that eounty,
presertation of a false insur-

nr, in violation of $ 4271 of thc
Code of 1919 of South Dakote.
convieted of violation of t^bc

Lfter trial by jury, in the Souib
ircuit court in May, 1920, ard

2Gt rr. 3.

res sentcDced to serve a term in the, both at law and in equity, and original
rtate penitentiary. On appeal to the I 

jurisdiction to try and determine all
mpreme court of the state, judgment of I eases of felonv. It accordingly had-aonviction was vacatcd attd new trial Ilrlenall jurisdiction to try thc charge of
qrantetl. State v. Egan,44 S. D. 2TS,lviolation of S {?71 of the Revised Code,
i3g N. W. 652. lrvhieh nrakes the presentation of false or

Egau was again brought to trial on I fraudulcnt insuranee claims a crime,
tbe 

-same ebarge in April, 1922, and was I punishable by imprisonment in tLe state
reain found guilt.r', and sentctteed to ' penitcntiary, which, by $ 3573, is made
sirvo a term in thc slate penitcntiar'.r'. , a {clony. The circuit court is not
Unon appcal to the supreme c'outt of j limited in its jurisdietion by the stat-
the state, the judgment of eonviction I utcs of the state to any particular eoun-
was affirmed. State v. Egan, 47 S. D. I t.v. Its jurisdiction extends as far as

i.-is5 X. W. fr2. I ti,e statuie law ertends in its applica-'Before the distriet court, the appellee I tion; namely, throughout the limits of
urged, as- he urges here, two prineipal I the state. The o-nly lim.itation in this
er6unds for granting the writ; namely,l regard, contained in the statute, is
ihat the information on which the con- | fourrd in $ 4654, which provides in sub-

antl that, in eonsequence, the trial eourt I court in which it is brought, or to which
was without jurisdiction in the cause. I the place of trial is changed by ortler

Section 4271 of the Revised Code of i of the court.
South Dakota, under which the eon- | Section 4771 provides that clefenclant
viction was had, so far as pertinent, I may demur to the information when it
reads as follows: appears upon its face t'that the court

((Every person who presents or eauses I is without jurisdiction of the offense
to be presented any false or fraudulent I charged." Section 4779 provides thft
claim,-or any proof in support of an-"-lobjections to which demurrers may be

such claim, upon ary contiact of insur- I [445] interposed under $ 4771 are
nnce for the navment of anv loss. . | 's'aivetl. with certain exceptions not hereance for the payment of any loss, . | 

's'aivetl, with certain exceptions not here
is punishable by imprisonnrent ir the I rnaterial, unless taken by demurrer.is punishable by imprisonnrent ir the I rnaterial, unless taken by demurrer.
stafe penitentiary not exceeding three i Appellee pleaded "not guilty" to thestate penttenttarY
years, or by fine not exceecling one I indictment.. _ _Elis -application., _ 

macle
ihousand dollars, or both." later, to withciraw the plea and demur,

The information charged in substance I was denietl, the court acting within its

;:rj

that the Firemen's Insurance Company, I diseretionary power. State v. Egan, 47
a corporation of Newark, New Jersel', I S. D. 1, 195 N. W. 642. .The supreme
was empowered to do business in the I court of South Dakota, in sustaining
state of South [444] Daliota, and, in I the verdict and upholding the convio-state of South [444] Daliota, and, in I the verdict and upholding the convio-
pursuanee of this authority, insured eer- | tion, held that the inforrnation suf-
iain property of petitioner, loeated in | ficiently chargecl a public offense under
Minnphahs ennntvr thst the nrooertv rnas I S -1271. 4 S. D. 273. 183 N. W. 652. andMinnehahaeounty; thatthepropertywasl$ 4271,44 S. D.273, 183 N' W.652, and
destroyed by fire, and that thereafter I it also held that the objection to the
petitioner presented a false elaim to.its I failure to state the venue in the infor-'agents; the language of the inforrnation I mation was waived- by the failure to

H:lt, i, : S, r' i?! :"'i',',i:lrl it r B l, fl I i 3 ; LH; u ffiabout the ytn day oI January, J-vzu, tnc ooscrveo rna[ wtra[ appe[ee ls reatry
said defendant, George W. Egan. then' see-tin-5"un ttr@is--E--reviep-Tr
anal there did wilfullr', unlawfulll', and, h@iortf
feloniouslv present and eause to be'th
presentecl"to'F. C. IT'hitehouse & Com-1t a
pany, who were at that time aeting as p@{tnp;znd-affi
[he agents for the Firemen's Insurance decisibn of the state court, holding thqt'
Comp-anv of Newark, New Jersep', a i urrder the Rcvised Code of 1919 (S$

false and fraudulent claim and proof in1.1725, 4777, 4779), the appellee waived
support of sueh claim."

The eircuit court of l\{innehaha coun-
tv, in which appellee's trial and con-
viction wrere had, by the provisions of
the Constitution of South Dakota ($ 14,
art. 5) and the Reviseil Code of South
Daliota 1919, S 4653, is given original
jurisdiction of all actions and eauses,
09 IJ. cal.

the ob.iection that the information tlid
not state the venue bv not demurring,
was a denial of his constitutional rights
whith ean be reviewed on habeas corpus.

It is the settled rule of this court that | .7d
habeas corpus calls in guestion only the | /' 

--t-

;urisaictioi of the .r;;a--;h"* jr[- | ni\.
ment is challenged. Andrews v. Sw.afiz. I 7*_.",l03e ' *'Z

- d .^2-r,\<-4't+'-2, l\*-'17. 1-. 1"ai 1,
\= 6_



,' r\ ] 
-' 

.\\
IF

G
. 

'-- \io*o"J-u ]'";'

#ffi#ffffiffi*ff 
fi ri*i ;il liil il ligI iE

 lr

fi iiii|}lli i{ iii iilii 
I igii|glf;l:tE

 ; E
*i i : : ; - s sir ; ! :i i i' E

' E
 ru - i ci

ffi-t ;, ;- : ie , 
a ; l; *; 

n - *; i, =
' =

, iiff ffifI ;S
iaiil i; i ii I i3ilfi i ii l i

ff ffiiii$i $l iffilii iiiilffiif 
: il iH

iiff ii i #riiii: i i iiii
i *l?ilii I f i i iiiff iiiia *i il :tri ii: 

s ? i i?i : l I iff I ii: ; ;1 i ii ii ii : ;iI.
i i:, iai: r=

 :, 
: s ;: i*, 

=
 r lif 

i I I I ; i fi l! I i* ; i lii}ff if3iliI ifi ii 
E

 i i; 
=

"? ,"-r-I 
i 3- 

*3;.
E

osN
=

;;H
dH

 ,E
8:.{ E

 E
 E

.E
 E

 g

inesogF
T

a(AaI,lFztrl
F

i
E

<

tE
r

UF
r

&p(-)

E
I

f.l
frEats.t.A