State v. Tolls

13 Tenn. 363
CourtTennessee Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 15, 1833
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 13 Tenn. 363 (State v. Tolls) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Tolls, 13 Tenn. 363 (Tenn. 1833).

Opinion

Catron, Ch. J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

The circuit court had jurisdiction of the case. State vs. Fields, Martin and Yerger’s Reports, 137.

The presentment is in due form, and must have been quashed because of the solicitor’s endorsement. This, it is said, ought to have been done by the clerk, not the solicitor. The truth is, it could not be done by either. The act to suppress gaming, of 1824, ch. 5, sec. 2, authorizes and makes it the duty of the grand jury to send for witnesses, on whose evidence to ground presentments. What they proved, the clerk has no right to know, and on whose information, whether witness or juror, the jury acted, is with them. It is the duty of the court to see there is no abuse, and if there be, to correct it by quashing the presentment; but this cannot be done on its face. The endorsement did no harm, nor could it have helped, had any thing appeared amiss. The defendant is bound to answer to the presentment. The judgment of the circuit court and county court of Warren, will be reversed, and the cause remanded to the circuit court for trial.

Judgment reversed.

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

Related

The People v. Barber
180 N.E. 633 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1932)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 Tenn. 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-tolls-tenn-1833.