Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

United States v. Jackalow

United States v. Jackalow

Supreme Court of the United States

March 24, 1862, Decided; December 1861 Term

No Number in Original

Opinion

 [*485]   [**226]  Mr. Justice NELSON. This case comes before us on a division of opinion of the judges of the Circuit Court of the United States for the district of New Jersey.

The first count in the indictment charges that the prisoner, with force and arms, on the high seas, in waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, on board of an American vessel called the "Spray," piratically, feloniously, and violently did assault one John F. Leete, the master of the vessel, putting him in bodily fear, and did feloniously, &c., seize, take, and carry away thirty pieces of gold coin, &c., of the goods and effects of the said master, contrary to the form of the statute, &c. The indictment also avers that the district of New Jersey is the district in which the prisoner [***3]  was found and first apprehended for the offence.

The jury found a special verdict, that the offence charged in the first count was committed by the prisoner on board the "Spray," which at the time was lying in the waters adjoining the State of Connecticut, between Norwalk harbor and Westchester county, in the State of New York, at a point five miles eastward of Lyons's Point, (which is the boundary between the States of New York and Connecticut,) and one mile and a half from the Connecticut shore at low-water mark.

The indictment was found under the 3d section of the act of Congress of May 15, 1820, which ] enacts that if any person shall, upon the high seas, or in any open roadstead, or any  [*486]  haven, basin, or bay, or in any river, &c., commit the crime of robbery in or upon any ship or vessel, or upon any of the ship's company, &c., or the lading thereof, &c., on being convicted before the Circuit Court of the United States for the district into which he shall be brought, or on which he shall be found, shall suffer death.

There is a proviso which declares that nothing in the section shall be construed to deprive any particular State of its jurisdiction over the offence,  [***4]  when committed within the body of a county, or authorize the courts of the United States to try such offenders after conviction or acquittance for the same offence in a State court.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

66 U.S. 484 *; 17 L. Ed. 225 **; 1861 U.S. LEXIS 502 ***; 1 Black 484

UNITED STATES vs. JACKALOW.

Prior History:  [***1]  This was an indictment against John, alias Johnny, alias John Canoe, alias Jackalow, a native of the Loo Choo Islands, for piracy on the high seas, found and tried in the Circuit Court of the United States for the district of New Jersey, and came into the Supreme Court on a certificate of the judges that they were divided in opinion.

The jury, in a special verdict, found that the offence charged in the indictment was committed by the prisoner at a certain place described and designated, but did not find whether that place was within the jurisdiction of any State, within any district of the United States, or upon the high seas. Did this verdict authorize the Circuit Court to pronounce judgment of death against the prisoner? That was the question on which the judges divided.

Case Summary

Procedural Posture

Defendant's conviction under § 3 of the act of Congress of May 15, 1820, for piracy on the high seas in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey came into the court on a certificate of the judges that they were divided in opinion.

Overview

Defendant was charged with piracy on the high seas. The jury, in a special verdict, found that the offense charged in the indictment was committed by defendant at a certain place described and designated, but did not find whether that place was within the jurisdiction of any state, within any district of the United States, or upon the high seas. Therefore, the judges of the circuit court were divided on whether this verdict authorized the circuit court to pronounce a judgment of death against defendant. The court noted that, in view of § 2 of article 3 of the Constitution, a material question was whether the offense was committed out of the jurisdiction of any particular state, because, if not, inasmuch as it was not committed within the State of New Jersey, the circuit court had no jurisdiction. The court concluded that the special verdict in this case did not furnish a ground for the court to determine whether the offense was committed out of the jurisdiction of a state.

Outcome

The court directed the circuit court to set aside the special verdict and grant a new trial.

CORE TERMS

Admiralty & Maritime Law, Maritime Personal Injuries, Maritime Death Actions, General Overview, Criminal Law & Procedure, Crimes Against Persons, Robbery, Jurisdiction & Venue, Jurisdiction, Constitutional Law, Fundamental Rights, Criminal Process, Right to Jury Trial, Venue, Civil Procedure, Jury Trials, Jury Instructions, Trials, Province of Court & Jury, Verdicts, Special Verdicts, Judgments, Relief From Judgments, Motions for New Trials, Juries & Jurors, Province of Court & Jury