Show i I I SHEETS IS 1 fREED fREEDON ON TECHNICALITY Complaint Against Chief of Po Police Police Police lice Dismissed by Judge Armstrong CASE BUNGLED BY HANSON DECISION INVITES AN APPEAL TO SUPREME COURT Chief of or Police Pol e George A Sheets was discharged from custody and the con conspiracy conspiracy charge r e against him dismissed yes yesterday yesterday yesterday morning by b Judge George G 0 Arm Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong strong in the Third district court This order was made by the court in a de tie decision cislon granting the motion m of the attorneys nes for the chief of police pollee to set aside the information tiled flied a him The Time contention of the attorneys for to the tha defendant Was tas as that the information which was almost Identical l with tho the original complaint filed flied against the chief really merged mr ed four distinct felonies Into a conspiracy charge which under the statutes is a misdemeanor This view was upheld by the court after the case was submitted with arguments by b Attorneys AttorI Attorneys nES Wedgewood edgewood Thurman and anti Christen Christensen sen leu for the defense and amid District Attorney Attorn I Fred C Loofbourow for the tIme state The ruling of Ute tile court did lid not enter into the merits merit of the case RW one way wa or the other but merely held that the complaint as asit a aIt ait it had been b n drawn by b County Attorney Willard Hanson was illegal al Appeal May Be Taken The decision of or the court does not necessarily necessarily prevent further prosecution of or orthe the chief on the felony charges as s II set t forth In the complaint though In order to do so new complaints must be drawn in the lower court and a new preliminary hearing had Whether or not this will willbe willbe 11 be done has not yet et been determined upon by b the county count attorney In his decision Judge Armstrong Invites an appeal to the supreme court ourt and with this In view yiew th the district attorney took exception to the finding of the court and announced his bis in intention Int intention t of ot conferring with the attorney general with regard to an appeal I I feel fecI that the court Ourt was wrong In Iii its decision in this case said Mr fr Loot Loof Loofbourow commenting on the decision but bul butI bulI I cannot say sa yet whether or not the state will appeal from the ruling My Iy intention intention Intention tion is to confer with Attorney General Breeden and consult more authorities be before before before fore forming any an definite plans as to whether or not I will wili take the case cale to the supreme court Establishes a Precedent I The rho decision of Judge Jud e Armstrong is not notI only an important on one in this ease case but butan butan butan an important one as af establishing e a legal Ip al I precedent for the state as alii a whole The question involved invoked is raised rallied in iA this caM ea e for th thA first time in ill Utah although there are decisions on 00 It from the supreme courts court of several other states The ruling of Judge Jude Armstrong is in effect that R a aman man charged with committing a felony cannot for the conspiracy from which the felony felon grew The only action that can be brought against him must be for tor the tile felony Itself As this is the first judicial ruling on the th Question In Utah It seems probable that the su supreme supreme preme prenie court will be asked to pass on the ruling of the lower court In this case calISe if Ir the decision is not reversed it will be rendered final and be considered as the law In such cases rases C ses Other Cases Moiled The complaints filed by b the county at attorney torney torne against Captain George Geor e Raleigh Ral h Attorney William Newton W V H Par P r rent W IV Yo W Yo Bell Beli Larry Larr OBrien OBries Jack OBrien James Donaldson and charging conspiracy In conned connection tion with the robbery of the In this city It last September are identical with that filed flied against Chief Sheets and by b the ruling of Judge Armstrong are all rendered void The release of Chief Sheets from the conspiracy charge is the lie second time that he has secured the th dismissal of or the charges against a him through the legal Igal er en errors errors of or the county attorney The first charge filed flied against him was that of be being beIn belog log ing In accessory after the fact In the Mr Mc McWhirter tc robbery robber Closely following the th expose of the robbery robber Chief Sheets was arrested l and given g en a preliminary hearing before belore Judge Jud e Armstrong The complaint charged him with aiding and abetting the perpetrators of the McWhirter robbery in their escape The stats states evidence was submitted and the attorneys attornS for tho the de tie defense defene tense fene moyd for a dismissal on the grounds that it was necessary to prove some overt act of the chief in aiding the criminals to escape espe The court held with the defense and the case was dismissed History of Case The last arrest of the chief was on the confession of W Yo H II one on of ot the bunco gang that swindled and robbed the The complaint filed flied charged criminal conspiracy and accused Chief Sheets Captain Raleigh Attorney Wil Vil William liam Newton and a saloon keeper known as Rossario with being in league with the robbers In the robbery and swindle ur of the two men in the Antler rooming house last Sep September Sept t A preliminary hearing healing at which W iv II H who had turned states evidence was the star witness for the prosecution was held Judge J J hU hit hitaker aker held Chief Sheets to the tile district court Information copied from the complaint drawn by the county attorney was filed tiled In the district court by the district attorney attorney ney ne The complaint alleged that Chief Sheets conspired with the other parties accused of the crime to cheat and defraud tourists passing through Salt Lak and further that as a part of the conspiracy W v W iV Bell Boll and W ti i H II falsely fal represented themselves as police pol officers and robbed Alexander of The Motion to Quash When hen the Information Was seas filed flied the de tie defense def f DIe moved moed that thit the information be quashed on the ground that the defend defendant defendant ant was charged with the th commission of or ofa ora a felony for which offense he h was never committed to court by b a mag istrate It was claimed that the inform information Information l tion charged the commission tOm of or grand larceny larcey obtaining money under unde false pretenses and impersonating ImP an of oC officer fleer with Intent to cheat and defraud while he was committed to the district court on the charge of or criminal conspiracy acy muty R and was as not given ghen a preliminary hearing on any an of the felonies charged The defense in its motion further assert asserted asserted asserted ed that the Information while charging criminal conspiracy recited the commis commission sion slon of these felonies feloni 5 thereby merging the conspiracy Into the felonies though only attempting to charge a misdemeanor The point wa vu was argued at considerable length lenth and a number of authorities and aDd decisions both from the United States Stat s sand and English courts were submitted d in ex ax exhaustive briefs on the motion After the me arguments argument were closed Judge Armstron Armstrong took the motion under advisement until yesterday morning Text of Decision When court opened yesterday esterday morning i ithe the court read the following decision In the case of the State SUIto of or Utah vs v Continued on Page 2 SHEETS IS FREED FREEDON FREEDON ON TECHNICALITY I Continued from Page 1 George Charge Ge rge A Sheets this Is the time here her heretofore heretofore set for the court to make its rul rol ruling I lug ing on the motion to set aside or quash quah I Ithe the information The Th court has not only on i given it days of time but has pitty I tt i nearly nearl exhausted the state law library fui fv authorities in this matter I In itt I this ease case I find that the defendant i Sheets ets was bound over oer to this tins ourt to answer U tp t the crime of criminal tv cm on n i iI The district attorney attorn lias nas i ian i in an n charging the defendant i i I in the t same or nearly the Ule same words that are iced by b the county attorney jr r the complaint and setting out as facts fads i the tI lii acts done don in pursuance to td the cn In n K and as so 50 s Et t out there Is no m j question in the mind of the court that at ai i i ile least le lOt one if not three felonies have hse bt n 1 charged to have hae been committed In tn Inder der the statutes of this state it is s ear to set out some at in addition to the agreement of o the parties and that such uch act was done to effect the object of or SUCh agreement And I IL take It tin the I attorneys atton s for th state have r rotated mated ate tin tilt act ad or acts which they would attempt I Ito to prove on the trial if one were had hadIt i I If JC the thc acts nc l proven bore out the allega allegations allegations Hong then I am of the opinion that n a J I II felony felon would lave la been shown bown hi in its corn com i i I pite ph t o details There is nothing before betor this court showing that any an act net could Uld ho hr i ii i shown which would not prove the com cern m I co lon of th tb tbs felony felon felonI I Reasons Re for forThe f R J r The American courts m to fol i ith I i th tb the iea reasoning of the early English i ces e t tand and n nt not t the finding made bv by the rr jr 1 lish judges in ISiS and nd in this i I it seems s to b bP be th the settled law that I I demeanors and felonies merge muge whre hr I Ithe they the form a constituent part of the lame ame act but that they the do merge I the same me net ct involves both offenses offen e A AI I number of authorities state that Thai a i l I to commit a felony felon is only cm om step towards toward the completion of a and at And nd In this case Cf where only onh one on at t is set t out and ald that act is IB relied upon to tn proy the conspiracy co and It also all if i prien en would weak wok show siow the th completed an cannot be so s separated as to prove the til misdemeanor and yet et stop sh of or proving pr pring ing lug the completed felony it would v f s m j I that the conspiracy being Ing but one on step I towards toward t the completion of th the a and aud being a constituent part of o the a at t ni i j I that this act both bh offense that I the information and ao complaint charge at laet kast one one felony felon if i not nt mor mt mote and that thit I Ithe the misdemeanor meR merges mels into that Eel fel pl 1 I Io ony i o This rule In is I recognized by b th the courts j I of this country especially by b the th courts court of o Massachusetts New York and Penn Pennsylvania I sylvania and in one of the federal ca cases a ait o oit it declares that this doctrine as I un understand understand I the t authority is declared the doctrine of the adjudications in t this coun cOlln country tr try Information Is Quashed Being satisfied sUs that this act wt cannot annot be b conspiracy and ami that there is s no stop stopping stopping stopping ping point pint from the time the act ad is start started started ed until it is 15 completed I believe that f the merger takes take place pla and that this in information information I formation really ren charges charge a felon and ard i that the defendant has not been n boun bourl l ml l lover over owr to this court coUr by bc O the magistrate for such felony felon therefore it itIs j I Is my m duty to quash this I The order may ma be so entered I suggest to the state that if I are not nt satisfied fk with this ruling of tIe tle e court ourt that they appeal Ppl this case cas I to the tho supreme court curt that they may ma have a I final ruling on this thi matter I believe the is issues issues sues SUC are clearly before the court and that no better case casp could be found in which it could be b more clearly set se ct forth b be before fore the supreme su reme court If I they do not care to do that then the they th can ean take such step steps as they the see e fir with regard to the offenses they have hac charged cared As 8 soon son as th the hourt ur had hd finished I Die Dietrict iR said Attorney Loofbourow arose art and ant The court curt will wJ permit us to take ex ox exception e to the ruling I will wi take the matter maUr up with th tto general gl and andee see ee what f my steps he ne ie desires to o take in the matter mater Considerable speculation is being lel beir in indulged indulged indulged in is ts s to what sour zur the prose prosecution pr CUtlet cution cuton will wi now nw pursue County Count Attorney j Willard Hanson HAnlon is out of th the city but butI It Wiard I was stated stat d on authority that that fen In k case cas the matter was appealed appele and the supreme court affirmed the tt ruling of the th lower lowr court curt the county count attorney will wi file a complaint charging criminal conspiracy without alleging that the felonies felie actual lr h 1 were committed committe as in the cas cS of the t e complaint which was S held hk invalid imald yes yesterday yesterday s It I Is not considered probable poble that complaints charging the te of a felony will wi be b drawn but an effort will tc It felon made to overcome the legal ob oh obstacles 01 wi by 1 amending the th complaint just passed upon Chief up Sheets yesterday esterd afternoon after de do declined de dined to comment on the ruling of thi tha thicourt th court further than to say 1 he had an anticipated the action acton of the court and anI the decision came as no surprise to him Ready for the Next Move Attorney Soren X X Christensen leading counsel for Chief Sheets said The delsio l was s a fair on o one and an clear clr clearly ly Iy within the law The conspiracy charge was brount against the chief merely because the county count attorney thought ought t h ht lit could secure a conviction for a R misdemeanor meanor more easily than for a f IO How it was as that both be 1 and Judge Hilton Hiton special s ial prosecutor for foi the state overlooked the fact that the complaint was illegal is more than I can compre comprehend comprehend hend bend The fact was wa potent to the attorneys atm for the defense the moment we saw F w the complaint but we preferred to wait walt until the case cane came before the district court before we WE filed fied our motion to quash I have not been informed as to what move moe the state tte Intends to make mako In the thealo case alo or te whether it will wi be b dropped but butI I do know that Chief heets beets Is innocent and that no n matter maUer mater what the tle trose ution does dos we are are ready for them and we will wi always alwa stand within our right t i tAll iAl All Al the th conspiracy charges char es against a the others named name In the complaint will wi probably ably abl now nol be he dismissed by the county at attorney attorney torney tome W H II and James James Don Donaldson Donald Donaldson ald on however have hae been bern charged In addition to conspiracy with wih the crimes of robbery and grand larceny larn and thesa thess thes affected b th the decision I eases cases are not tf by |