Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

FRANKLIN v. UNITED STATES.

decided: March 14, 1910.

FRANKLIN
v.
UNITED STATES.



ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.

Author: Fuller

[ 216 U.S. Page 566]

 MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a writ of error brought directly to this court from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York, and the grounds upon which it is rested appear to be --

First. That under the sixty-second Article of War, § 1342, Revised Statutes, which reads:

[ 216 U.S. Page 567]

     "All crimes not capital, and all disorders and neglects, which officers and soldiers may be guilty of, to the prejudice of good order and military discipline, though not mentioned in the foregoing Articles of War, are to be taken cognizance of by a general or a regimental, garrison, or field officers' court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and punished at the discretion of such court," a court-martial has exclusive jurisdiction of the offenses charged herein, inasmuch as plaintiff in error was an officer of the United States army; and,

Second. That the case involved the construction or application of the Constitution of the United States, and that the constitutionality of a law of the United States was drawn in question because, as is alleged, § 2 of the act of July 7, 1898, is unconstitutional, in that it undertakes to delegate the power of legislation to the state legislatures.

1. It is well settled that the sixty-second Article of War does not vest, nor purport to vest, exclusive jurisdiction in courts-martial, and that civil courts have concurrent jurisdiction over all offenses committed by a military officer which may be punished by a court-martial under the provisions of that article.

The thirtieth section of the act of March 3, 1863, c. 75, 12 Stat. 736, provided that in time of war, insurrection or rebellion certain offenses, including murder, "shall be punishable by the sentence of a general court-martial or military commission, when committed by persons who are in the military service of the United States, and subject to the Articles of War; and the punishments for such offenses shall never be less than those inflicted by the laws of the State, Territory, or district in which they may have been committed."

In Coleman v. Tennessee, 97 U.S. 509, it was held that this statute did not confer upon courts-martial exclusive jurisdiction for the trial of the offenses mentioned.

In Grafton v. United States, 206 U.S. 333, 348, it was expressly declared that the jurisdiction of courts-martial is not

[ 216 U.S. Page 568]

     exclusive. Undoubtedly the general rule is that the jurisdiction of civil courts is concurrent as to offenses triable before courts-martial. See Opinion of Attorney-General Cushing, 6 Op. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.