State v. Tweed

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State v. Tweed

27 N.J.L. 111

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedJune 15, 1858

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 27 N.J.L. 111 (State v. Tweed) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Tweed, 27 N.J.L. 111 (N.J. 1858).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

The Chief Justice.

This-indictment is founded on the 51st section of (he act to regulate elections. Nix. Dig. 223. It charges that the defendant did unlawfully counsel and advise one J. M. to give his vote, he, the said defendant, well knowing that the said J. M. was not then and there duly qualified to vote at the said election. There is no specification of the disability which constituted the disqualification of the voter. For the reasons assigned in The State v. Moore, the indictment is radically defective, and the Oyer and Terminer should be advised accordingly

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

The Chief Justice.

This-indictment is founded on the 51st section of (he act to regulate elections. Nix. Dig. 223. It charges that the defendant did unlawfully counsel and advise one J. M. to give his vote, he, the said defendant, well knowing that the said J. M. was not then and there duly qualified to vote at the said election. There is no specification of the disability which constituted the disqualification of the voter. For the reasons assigned in The State v. Moore, the indictment is radically defective, and the Oyer and Terminer should be advised accordingly

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 N.J.L. 111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-tweed-nj-1858.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack