State v. Larumbo

Supreme Court of South Carolina

State v. Larumbo

16 S.C.L. 183

Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided January 15, 1824·Published

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered< by

Mr Jwttc&i Gantt.

There is certainly an. apparent inconsistency in-the discrimination which the .jury have made as to. the guilt of .these, Seyeral,defendants, ..who .were implicated in.the.same indictment,?. [184]*184the offence charged against each was the same, and the evidence-equally affected both. The. court, therefore, in the exercise of that discretion with which they are invested, are of opinion, that a new trial should be granted.

Wright, for motion. Attorney General, contra.; JVott, .Johnson and Bay, Justices, concurred.— Colcoe7'/ Justice, I dissent,

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

The opinion of the Court was delivered< by

Mr Jwttc&i Gantt.

There is certainly an. apparent inconsistency in-the discrimination which the .jury have made as to. the guilt of .these, Seyeral,defendants, ..who .were implicated in.the.same indictment,?. [184]*184the offence charged against each was the same, and the evidence-equally affected both. The. court, therefore, in the exercise of that discretion with which they are invested, are of opinion, that a new trial should be granted.

Wright, for motion. Attorney General, contra.; JVott, .Johnson and Bay, Justices, concurred.— Colcoe7'/ Justice, I dissent,

State v. Larumbo, 16 S.C.L. 183 (S.C. 1824).

Pincite

16 S.C.L. 183 (State v. Larumbo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.