State v. . Houston

74 N.C. 549
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 5, 1876·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Reads, J.

It was competent for his Honor to authorize the sheriff or other person, to take the recognizance of the defendants for the appearance of the principal defendant at the next term, to answer the charge of the State against him, his Honor having fixed the amount of the recognizance. And although the recognizance authorized to be taken was put in flie form of a bond with conditions, signed and sealed by the defendants, yet it is valid as a recognizance.

The taking of a recognizance consists in making and attesting a memorandum of the acknowledgment of a debt due the State, and of the conditions on which it is to be defeated. State v. Edney, 2 Winst., 71.

There is no error. Let this be certified.

Pee Cdkiam. Judement affirmed.

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

State v. . Houston, 74 N.C. 549 (N.C. 1876).

74 N.C. 549 (State v. . Houston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. . Bradsher
127 S.E. 349 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1925)
State v. Morgan.
48 S.E. 604 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1904)
State v. . Jones
88 N.C. 683 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1883)