CHAPTER LVI CRIMINAL CODE, CHAPTER ELEVEN OFFENSES WITHIN THE ADMIRALTY AND MARITIME AND THE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES § 933. Crim. Code § 272. Places within or Waters upon Which Sections of This Chapter Shall Apply. § 934. Crim. Code § 273. § 935. Crim. Code § 274. § 936. Crim. Code § 275. § 937. Crim. Code § 276. § 938. Crim. Code § 277. 939. Crim. Code § 278. § 940. Crim. Code § 279. $941. Crim. Code § 280. § 942. Crim. Code § 281. Murder. Punishment for Murder; for Manslaughter. Attempt to Commit Murder or Manslaughter. Having Carnal Knowledge of Female under Seduction of Female Passenger on Vessel. Payment of Fine to Female Seduced; Evidence § 943. Crim. Code § 282. Loss of Life by Misconduct of Officers, etc., of § 944. Crim. Code § 283. $945. Crim. Code § 284. $946. Crim. Code § 285. § 947. Crim. Code § 286. $948. Crim. Code § 287. $949. Crim. Code § 288. $950. Crim. Code § 289. Vessel. Robbery. Arson of Dwelling House. Receiving, etc., Stolen Goods. Laws of States Adopted for Punishing Wrongful § 933. Criminal Code. Sec. 272. Places within or Waters upon Which Section of This Chapter Shall Apply. The crimes and offenses defined in this chapter shall be punished as herein prescribed: First. When committed upon the high seas, or on any other waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State, or when committed within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State on board any vessel belonging in whole or in part to the United States or any citizen thereof, or to any corporation created by or under the laws of the United States, or of any State, Territory, or District thereof. Second. When committed upon any vessel registered, licensed, or enrolled under the laws of the United States, and being on a voyage upon the waters of any of the Great Lakes, namely: Lake Superior, Lake Michigan, Lake Huron, Lake Saint Clair, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, or any of the waters connecting any of said lakes, or upon the River Saint Lawrence where the same constitutes the International boundary line. Third. When committed within or on any lands reserved or acquired for the exclusive use of the United States, and under the exclusive jurisdiction thereof, or any place purchased or otherwise acquired by the United States by consent of the legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of a fort, magazine, arsenal, dockyard, or other needful building. Fourth. On any island, rock, or key, containing deposits of guano, which may, at the discretion of the President, be considered as appertaining to the United States.1 An indictment is sufficient which describes the tract of land on which the crime was committed by metes and bounds.2 This chapter deals with offenses federal in their nature, wherever committed, except, where by special enactment, it is provided otherwise; but it does not extend the jurisdiction to include the District of Columbia. Taking fish with felonious intent from a pound situated beyond the three mile limit in the Atlantic Ocean is punishable in the Federal Courts. This section confers exclusive jurisdiction upon the Federal Courts of crimes 4 § 933. 135 Stat. L. 1142. 2 Brown v. United States, 257 Fed. 46, C. C. A. (5th Cir.). 3 Johnson v. United States, 225 U.S. 405, 416, 56 L. ed. 1142, 32 S. C. 748. 5 4 Johnson v. United States, 225 U. S. 405, 414, 416, 56 L. ed. 1142, 32 S. C. 748. 5 Miller v. United States, 242 Fed. 907, 155 C. C. A. 495 (3d Cir.). committed on an Indian Reservation. The locality of the offense is the basis of the jurisdiction of the Federal Court." The land upon which the act was committed must be reserved for the exclusive use of the United States, and merely holding it in trust for the use of an Indian is not sufficient. The territorial jurisdiction of the United States does not depend upon the size of the particular areas which are held for Federal purposes." The United States Courts have jurisdiction over crimes committed by one Indian upon another on an Indian Reservation.10 § 934. Criminal Code. Sec. 273. Murder. Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Every murder perpetrated by poison, lying in wait, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing; or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any arson, rape, burglary, or robbery; or perpetrated from a premeditated design unlawfully and maliciously to effect the death of any human being other than him who is killed, is murder in the first degree. Any other murder is murder in the second degree.1 Where the acts constituting an assault are alleged to have been done with malice aforethought, it is not necessary to make such allegations in the preliminary averment.2 An indictment charging that A. B. & C. acting jointly, killed and murdered D. is sufficient to authorize the conviction of one of them, although the others may be acquitted. An indictment charging the homicide to have been caused by shooting and drowning is not demurrable for duplicity or uncertainty. A homicide committed by a Ex parte Van Moore, 221 Fed. 954. 'Atlantic Transport Co. of West Virginia v. Imbrovek, 234 U. S. 52, 58 L. ed. 1208, 34 S. C. 733. 8 United States v. Lewis, 253 Fed. 469. United States v. Pelican, 232 U. S. 442, 450, 58 L. ed. 676, 34 S. C. 396. 10 Ibid. 934. Formerly R. S. Sec. 5339, 35 Stat. L. 1143. See also comments and notes under the next section defining manslaughter. 2 Holt v. United States, 218 U. S. 245, 54 L. ed. 1021, 31 S. C. 2. 3 St. Clair v. United States, 154 U. S. 134, 38 L. ed. 936, 14 S. C. 1002. 4 Andersen v. United States, 170 U. S. 481, 42 L. ed. 1116, 18 S. C. 689. United States Deputy Marshal, in performance of his duty in protecting the life and person of a United States Supreme Court Justice, is an "act done in pursuance of a law of the United States" and cannot, therefore, be an offense against the State law. Petitioner held by State authorities is dischargeable on habeas corpus to United States Circuit Court. An indictment under this section need not charge that the crime was done feloniously. An indictment for murder, which fails to set forth the time and the place of the death, is fatally defective. An indictment for conspiracy resulting in the killing of a United States Deputy Marshal is not bad for duplicity, as charging defendant with the conspiracy and murder. The defendant having been acquitted of the charge of murder may still be punished for the conspiracy, if proved. Where an indictment for murder in the Chickasaw Nation, Indian Tribe, avers that both deceased and accused were white men, proof that the deceased was a white man lays the jurisdiction, and the averment as to citizenship of the accused is surplusage. An indictment for murder as an accessory before the fact was quashed, because there was then no act of Congress prescribing punishment for such an offense.10 In an indictment for murder committed on board a vessel on the high seas, by an alien, it is sufficient to allege that the vessel was owned by a citizen of the United States, without alleging the national character of the vessel." The United States has exclusive jurisdiction over land ceded by a State, even though the terms of the cession provide that the State shall retain concurrent jurisdiction for the execution of civil or criminal processes by State officers.12 A vessel's certificate of registry and proof that she carried the United States flag are properly admitted on the trial and establish a prima facie case of proper registry and nationality of the vessel and its owner.13 5 In re Neagle, 39 Fed. 833. 6 Myres v. United States, 256 Fed. 779 (C. C. A. 5th Cir.). 7 Ball v. United States, 140 U. S. 118, 35 L. ed. 377, 11 S. C. 761. 8 United States v. Davis, 103 Fed. 457. 'Stevenson v. United States 86, Fed. 106, 29 C. C. A. 600 (5th Cir.). 1 10 United States v. Ramsay, Hempstead, 481, Fed. Cas. No. 16115; for the present law see § 992, supra. 11 United States v. Demarchi, 5 Blatch. 84, Fed. Cas. No. 14944. 12 United States v. Meagher, 37 Fed. 875. 13 St. Clair v. United States, 154 U. S. 134, 38 L. ed. 936, 14 S. C. 1002. Since this section is not procedural, and since, by Act of Congress, Alaska had adopted the laws of the State of Oregon, where not in conflict with those of the United States, the Oregon rules of procedure take precedence over the rules of the Common Law, in Alaska.1 A person indicted for murder but convicted of an included crime, by procuring that conviction to be set aside, waives the right to set up a plea of former jeopardy and may be tried again for murder.15 The common law distinction between misdemeanors and felonies has no application to persons in military service. Prior acquittal by a Military Court of Inquiry is a bar to a civil prosecution, and the prisoner is put in "double jeopardy "thereby.16 The Government bears the burden of proving that the crime was committed on land under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States.17 Intoxication or delirium from use of drugs with knowledge that it is likely to produce such effect, is no excuse for crime. But where defendant takes an overdose of chloral though believing that such overdose would produce unconsciousness, he nevertheless is not legally responsible for acts committed in an insane frenzy actually induced by such overdose.18 Intoxication is no excuse for crime. It must be considered, however, as bearing upon the mental condition of the defendant, in determining his capacity of entertaining a specific intent.19 The willful killing of a soldier by a sergeant of the guard while on duty is not necessarily a justifiable homicide. A soldier is obliged to obey only the lawful orders of his superior officers.20 To support the plea of justifiable homicide, defendant must have retreated as far as he could have done with safety to himself. There must have been apparent imminent danger of death or grievous bodily harm to himself, or to his friend for whose protection he was acting; and defendant's belief as to such danger must have been honest, and reasonable 14 United States v. Clark, 46 Fed. 633; but see present code of Alaska. 15 United States v. Gonzales, 206 Fed. 239, but see § 235, Vol. I. 16 Crafton v. United States, 206 U. S. 333, 51 L. ed. 1064, 27 S. C. 749. 17 United States v. Meagher, 37 Fed. 875. 18 Perkins v. United States, 228 Fed. 408, 142 C. C. A. 638 (4th Cir.). 19 United States v. Meagher, 37 Fed. 875. 20 United States v. Carr, 1 Woods, 480, Fed. Cas. No. 14732. |