State v. Herring

Supreme Court of South Carolina

State v. Herring

3 S.C.L. 159

DecidedMay 15, 1802

StatusPublished

This text of 3 S.C.L. 159 (State v. Herring) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Herring, 3 S.C.L. 159 (S.C. 1802).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion for a new trial.

Defendant was indicted for stealing fifteen hogs, contrary to the A. A. 1789, P. L.,486, which subjects the offender to a fine or penalty of j£5, for each and every hog, &c. The evidence proved that he stole three pigs ; but the jury found him guilty, generally.

The attorney general, Pringle, offered to obtain a remission from the governor of all the penalties, except as to the three hogs actually stolen ; but Holmes, of counsel for defendant, would not agree to this proposition. So the court without hearing argument, ordered a new trial. .

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

Motion for a new trial.

Defendant was indicted for stealing fifteen hogs, contrary to the A. A. 1789, P. L.,486, which subjects the offender to a fine or penalty of j£5, for each and every hog, &c. The evidence proved that he stole three pigs ; but the jury found him guilty, generally.

The attorney general, Pringle, offered to obtain a remission from the governor of all the penalties, except as to the three hogs actually stolen ; but Holmes, of counsel for defendant, would not agree to this proposition. So the court without hearing argument, ordered a new trial. .

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 S.C.L. 159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-herring-sc-1802.