Galloway v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Galloway v. State

20 Ind. 14

DecidedMay 15, 1863

StatusPublished

This text of 20 Ind. 14 (Galloway v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Galloway v. State, 20 Ind. 14 (Ind. 1863).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant was prosecuted in the Common Pleas for an assault and battery on one Phillipi. The assault and battery was admitted; but it was contended that the defendant had been already convicted of the same offence. Questions are raised as to whether such former conviction was improperly procured by the said defendant, so as to in[15]*15validate said judgment, or prevent it from operating as a bar.

McDonald, Roach § Lewis, for the appellant. Jacob S. Rroadwell, Samuel H. Bushirh and Oscar B. Hord, for the State.

The Court found the defendant guilty, and assessed a fine, &c.

"We can not, under the decision in Hamilton v. Railsback, at this term, disturb this judgment. The record does not, in view of the decision quoted, contain the necessary statement to show us that all the evidence is before us.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant was prosecuted in the Common Pleas for an assault and battery on one Phillipi. The assault and battery was admitted; but it was contended that the defendant had been already convicted of the same offence. Questions are raised as to whether such former conviction was improperly procured by the said defendant, so as to in[15]*15validate said judgment, or prevent it from operating as a bar.

McDonald, Roach § Lewis, for the appellant. Jacob S. Rroadwell, Samuel H. Bushirh and Oscar B. Hord, for the State.

The Court found the defendant guilty, and assessed a fine, &c.

"We can not, under the decision in Hamilton v. Railsback, at this term, disturb this judgment. The record does not, in view of the decision quoted, contain the necessary statement to show us that all the evidence is before us.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 Ind. 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/galloway-v-state-ind-1863.