Rankin v. State

Supreme Court

Rankin v. State

78 U.S. 380, 20 L. Ed. 175, 11 Wall. 380, 1870 U.S. LEXIS 1486

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedApril 10, 1871

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 78 U.S. 380 (Rankin v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rankin v. State, 78 U.S. 380, 20 L. Ed. 175, 11 Wall. 380, 1870 U.S. LEXIS 1486 (1871).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice BRADLEY

delivered the opinion of the court.

The difficulty with the case, as brought before us, is that the judgment was not a final one in the case. This court, under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act, can only take cognizance of final judgments of the State courts. And although the court has been liberal in its construction of the statute as to what judgments are final, yet the judgment in this case cannot be deemed such by any reasonable stretch of construction. It is a rule in criminal law in favorem, vitce, in capital cases, that when a special plea in bar is found against the prisoner, either upon issue tried by a jury, -or upon a point of law decided by the court, he shall not be concluded or *382 convicted thereon, but shall have judgment of respondeat ouster, and may plead over to the felony the general issue, not guilty. * And this is the effect of the-judgment of reversal rendered by the Supreme Court of Tennessee in this case; so that in no sense can that judgment be deemed a final one. The case must go back and be tried upon its merits, and final judgment must be rendered before this' court can take jurisdiction. If after that it should be brought here for review, we can then examine the defendant’s plea and decide upon its sufficiency.

Writ op error dismissed.

*

4 Blackstone’s Commentaries, 338.

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

Mr. Justice BRADLEY

delivered the opinion of the court.

The difficulty with the case, as brought before us, is that the judgment was not a final one in the case. This court, under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act, can only take cognizance of final judgments of the State courts. And although the court has been liberal in its construction of the statute as to what judgments are final, yet the judgment in this case cannot be deemed such by any reasonable stretch of construction. It is a rule in criminal law in favorem, vitce, in capital cases, that when a special plea in bar is found against the prisoner, either upon issue tried by a jury, -or upon a point of law decided by the court, he shall not be concluded or *382 convicted thereon, but shall have judgment of respondeat ouster, and may plead over to the felony the general issue, not guilty. * And this is the effect of the-judgment of reversal rendered by the Supreme Court of Tennessee in this case; so that in no sense can that judgment be deemed a final one. The case must go back and be tried upon its merits, and final judgment must be rendered before this' court can take jurisdiction. If after that it should be brought here for review, we can then examine the defendant’s plea and decide upon its sufficiency.

Writ op error dismissed.

*

4 Blackstone’s Commentaries, 338.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 U.S. 380, 20 L. Ed. 175, 11 Wall. 380, 1870 U.S. LEXIS 1486, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rankin-v-state-scotus-1871.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack