State v. . Johnson

6 N.C. 201
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJuly 5, 1812
StatusPublished

This text of 6 N.C. 201 (State v. . Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. . Johnson, 6 N.C. 201 (N.C. 1812).

Opinion

Lowrxe, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the Court: In this case the original indictment and not a transcript was sent to Robeson Superior Court, and the Defendant has been tried on it and convicted. Had it not been for the peculiar words of the act of 1806, the objections now urged would never have been thought of. It is a novel objection that the Defendant has been tried on the *202 original indictment, and not on a copy. TJie objection is not substantial: for the Defendant by pleading to the , . , , . , original indictment did.not loose any advantage that he could kave bad by being tried on the- transcript. The original is better evidence of the facts charged, and of the finding of the Grand Jury, than any transcript or copy can be. The object of the clause- of the act relied on, is to multiply the chances of a fair and impartial trial by Jury; and as that was in no respect abridged by the Defendant’s taking his trial on the original bill, the reasons offered in arrest, must be overruled. Judgment for the State.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 N.C. 201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-johnson-nc-1812.