State v. . Antonio

11 N.C. 200
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. . Antonio. Read the opinion of the Court — 11 N.C. 200
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided December 5, 1825·Published

Opinions

The prisoner moved, before judgment, to set aside the verdict, and have a new venire because of the denial of his prayer for a jury de medietate, which being refused, and judgment pronounced, the prisoner appealed. Judge Williams informed me that he allowed it at a court of oyer and terminer held at Wilmington many years ago for the trial of some prisoners who were aliens and natives of France. *Page 89

GASTON: It seems, then, to have been considered the law; the Legislature has not since altered it.

Attorney-General for the State. (204)

The Court differed in opinion, HALL and HENDERSON holding that the prisoner was not entitled to a jury de medietate, and the Chief Justice that he was, and they delivered their respective opinions seriatim, as follows:

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

State v. . Antonio, 11 N.C. 200 (N.C. 1825).

11 N.C. 200 (State v. . Antonio) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.