
    Case No. 16,333.
    UNITED STATES v. SMITH.
    [1 Dill. 212.] 
    
    Circuit Court, E. D. Arkansas.
    1870.
    Conspiraos—Resisting an Officer—What Essential.
    [Attorney and client conspiring to resist an officer, are equally guilty, it is not necessary to show actual violence. Threats and acts intended to terrify, or of a character to terrify, a prudent officer, are sufficient, even though he be not prevented thereby from executing his process.]
    At law.
   CALDWELL, District Judge.

If a client and his attorney enter into a conspiracy to resist,an officer in performing his duty, both are equally guilty; and in an indictment for this offence, it is not necessary to show actual violence; threats and acts intended to terrify, or calculated by their nature to terrify a prudent and reasonable officer, are sufficient, even though he be not prevented thereby from executing his process.  