Newell v. State
This text of 2 Conn. 38 (Newell v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The question is, what is intended by exhibiting a complaint, or information, in criminal cases. The presentment of the complaint, signed by some proper informing officer, to a court or public officer, who has authority to receive the same, and to issue a warrant te apprehend the offender, and bring him to trial, must be a compliance with the law. In this case, a justice of the peace had power to cause the offender to be apprehended; and though be had not final cognizance of the offence, he had pow er to take proper measures to cause him to appear before a court of competent jurisdiction to try him. To exhibit the information to such public officer, is a strict and literal compliance with the statute; and such has been the immemorial and uniform usage in the state. And unless such power is given to single ministers of justice, a very convenient opportunity would often be afforded to offenders, to escape from justice.
I think there is no error in the judgment complained of.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 Conn. 38, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newell-v-state-conn-1816.