People v. Burns

California Supreme Court Apr 26, 1888 No. No. 20382Published

Before: Thornton

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an indictment for an election inspector's refusal to administer an oath is sufficient if it alleges the voter's status as a qualified elector, and that the term 'knowingly' in the Penal Code refers only to knowledge of facts, not the law.

Issues

Whether an indictment for an election inspector's refusal to administer an oath is insufficient for failing to explicitly aver the voter's registration status.
Whether the jury instruction regarding the defendant's knowledge of the law and the definition of 'knowingly' under the Penal Code was erroneous.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The averment objected to as insufficient is matter merely introductory to the offense charged, —matter of inducement.”

“The signification of the word “knowingly,” when used in the Penal Code, is defined by its seventh section (fifth subdivision) as importing only a knowledge that the facts exist which bring the act or omission within its provisions.”

Synopsis

Criminal Law—Indictment oe Election Inspector for Breach of Duty—Refusal to Swear Voter—Election in San Francisco.— The indictment set forth that on the twelfth day of April, 1887, at the city and county of San'Franciseo, at a special election called by the board of election commissioners for the purpose of voting for or against the new charter proposed by the board of freeholders elected, etc., that defendant was the duly appointed, qualified, and acting inspector of election of the first precinct of the twenty-ninth assembly district, in the city and county, and while defendant was acting as such inspector at the said election for the district and precinct aforesaid, one Charles Myron Emerson, “ a duly qualified elector of the said city and county, offered to vote at the polling-place of said precinct that said Emerson was thereupon challenged that he had before voted that day; that Emerson then and there demanded that defendant administer to him the oath prescribed by section 1234 of the Political Code (reciting the oath); and that defendant, well knowing the provisions of the laws of the state of California relating to elections and the duties with which he was charged thereunder as inspector aforesaid, knowingly, willfully, fraudulently, and feloniously refused to administer to said Emerson the oath aforesaid. Held, that the indictment was sufficient, and that an averment that Emerson was registered on the precinct register was not essential.

Id.—Instruction—Presumption of Knowledge of Law. — On the trial, the court, at the request of the prosecution, charged the jury that the “ defendant is presumed by law, as inspector, to know at his peril what the law was, and it would furnish no excuse to him that he may have supposed that the law was different from what it was. But in order that you may find him guilty, it must appear that he acted knowingly and fraudulently held, that the instruction was proper.

Thornton, J. The defendant was convicted of a violation of section 41 of the Penal Code. That section is as follows: “Every person charged with the performance of any duty, under the provision of any law of this state relating to elections, who willfully neglects or refuses to perform it, or who, in his official capacity, knowingly and fraudulently acts in contravention or violation of any of the provisions of such laws, is, unless a different punishment for such acts or omissions is prescribed by this code, punishable by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment in the state prison not exceeding five years, or by both.”

The defendant did not demur to the indictment, but makes the objection here that the facts stated in it do not constitute a public offense.

The indictment set forth that on the twelfth day of April, 1887, at the city and county of San Francisco, at a special election called by the board of election commissioners for the purpose of voting for or against the new charter proposed by the board of freeholders elected, etc., that defendant was the duly appointed, qualified, and acting inspector of election of the first precinct of the twenty-ninth assembly district in the said city and county, and while defendant was acting as such inspector at the said election for the district and precinct aforesaid, one Charles Myron Emerson, “a duly qualified elector of the said city and county, offer to vote at the polling-place of said precinct ”; that said Emerson was thereupon challenged that he had before voted that day; that Emerson then and there demanded that defendant ■ administer to him the oath prescribed by section 1234 of the Political Code (reciting the oath); and that defendant, [629]well knowing the provisions of the laws of the state of California relating to elections and the duties with which he was charged thereunder as inspector aforesaid, knowingly, willfully, fraudulently, and feloniously refused to •administer to said Emerson the oath aforesaid.

It is prescribed by the act of the legislature in regard to the registration of voters in the city and county of San Francisco (see Stats. 1877-78, p. 303, sec. 15), which provides, inter alia, for the registration of electors on precinct registers, "that no person shall vote at any election except he be legally-registered upon the precinct register of the precinct in which he is a qualified voter.”

It is contended that to constitute a person a duly qualified elector of the city and county of San Francisco, he must be registered on the register of the precinct where he offers to vote, and that the allegation that Emerson was a duly qualified elector of the city and ■county of San Francisco, without making it appear by averment that he was registered on the precinct register, is insufficient, and that as the indictment is wanting in this latter averment, it does not state facts constituting a public offense.

People v. Burns

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief