United States v. Blunt

24 F. Cas. 1183, 7 Chi. Leg. News 258

Opinion

The COURT

held:

1. That the bill was defective, in that it alleged no overt act; the act of March 2nd, 1867, requires some overt act to be committed, before the offense is complete.

2. That the motion for a new trial is allowed, and

3. That the prosecution is bound by the statute of limitations.

The defendant, Blunt, was ordered to be discharged.