Francis Robert Newton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 05 May 1855 |
| Date | 05 May 1855 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 139 E.R. 692
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 3 C. L. R. 1122; 24 L. J. C. P. 148; 1 Jur. N. S. 591.
[97] in the matter of francis egbert newton. May 5, 1855. [S. C. 3 C. L. E. 1122; 24 L. J. C. P. 148; 1 Jur. N. S. 591.] This court has no power to grant a habeas corpus to bring up a prisoner who has been convicted at the Central Criminal Court, on the ground that the offence charged was committed at a place out of the jurisdiction of that court.-The proper course is, to apply to the Attorney-General for his fiat for the allowance of a writ of error coram nobis, the granting or withholding of which is matter for his discretion.-The court declined to allow the motion for the habeas to be made by the father of the prisoner, but required it to be made by counsel. At the session held at the Central Criminal Court in December last, Francis Eobert Newton and William Philip Newton were tried upon an indictment, charging them, in the first count, with an attempt to murder one Adam Stewart Kerr, by striking him with a whip and a stick; in the second count, with a felonious assault; and in the third count, with a misdemeanor in unlawfully wounding the prosecutor. To this indictment, the prisoners pleaded not guilty. They were acquitted of the felony, but found guilty of the misdemeanor, under the 14 & 15 Viet. c. 19, s. 5 (a)1. They were thereupon sentenced to be imprisoned in the county gaol, Horsemonger Lane, the former for a period of nine the latter for three calendar months. The indictment alleged that the offence was committed in " the grounds of the Beulah Spa at Norwood, in the parish of Lambeth, and within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court." Having afterwards ascertained that the grounds of the [98] Beulah Spa were not in the parish of Lambeth, but in the parish of Croydon, and consequently not within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court,-being upwards of seven hundred and seventy yards from the nearest boundary of the parish of Lambeth, or any other parish or place within the jurisdiction of that court (af,-the prisoners caused application to be made to Lord Campbell and Crowder, J., at the next session, to direct the officer of the court so to draw up the record of their conviction as to leave it open to them to raise the question of jurisdiction upon a writ of error. The application, however, was refused, as being too late. The prisoners then applied to the Attorney-General for his fiat for the allowance of a writ of error, the application being supported by affidavits and by counsel's (a)1 Which enacts, that, " if upon the trial of any indictment for any felony, except murdor or manslaughter, where the indictment shall allege that the defendant did cut, stab, or wound any person, the jury shall be satisfied that the defendant is guilty of the cutting...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Datuk Harun bin Haji Idris v Officer-ln-Charge, Pudu Prison
-
R v Secretary of State for Home Affairs, ex parte Greene
...cannot be traversed or impeached by affidavit ( Carus Wilson's Case (1845) 7 Q.B. 984; Ex. p. Lees (1858) E.B. and E. 828; re Newton (1855) 16 C.B. 97). On the other hand in cases other than for some criminal or supposed criminal matter and except cases of imprisonment for debt or by proces......
- Re Datuk Harun Haji Idris
-
Hughes (The State) v Lennon and Others
...ante p. 70. (1) 1 Q. B. 66. (2) 3 Q. B. 792. (3) 6 Q. B. 620. (4) 7 Q. B. 984. (5) 10 Q. B. 492. (6) 3 E. & B. 607. (7) 10 Ex. 201. (8) 16 C. B. 97. (9) E. B. & E. 828. (10) 3 H. & N. 227. (11) 4 B. & S. 935. (12) L. R. 8 Q. B. 102. (13) 1 Wms. Saund. 228 c. (14) L. R. 2 C. C. R. 74. (15) [......