Commonwealth v. Wood

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Wood

3 Binn. 414, 1811 Pa. LEXIS 17

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 1, 1811·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The number of witnesses summoned seems extravagant. We would not encourage the practice of the public prosecutor’s permitting the man who institutes the prosecution, to summon as many as he pleases. This case is in some respects of a singular nature. There were seven defendants, and they were connected with others not defendants. The court will therefore allow the costs of twenty-six, witnesses, double the number sworn, provided the counsel can name so many, who in their opinion were material.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The number of witnesses summoned seems extravagant. We would not encourage the practice of the public prosecutor’s permitting the man who institutes the prosecution, to summon as many as he pleases. This case is in some respects of a singular nature. There were seven defendants, and they were connected with others not defendants. The court will therefore allow the costs of twenty-six, witnesses, double the number sworn, provided the counsel can name so many, who in their opinion were material.

Commonwealth v. Wood, 3 Binn. 414, 1811 Pa. LEXIS 17 (Pa. 1811).

Pincite

3 Binn. 414 (Commonwealth v. Wood) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related