State v. . Webb

2 N.C. 103
Superior Court of North Carolina·Decided September 5, 1794·Published·Cited by 17 cases

Opinion

(104) These authorities do not say that depositions taken in the absence of the prisoner shall be read, and our act of Assembly, 1715, ch. 16, clearly implies the depositions to be read must be taken in his presence. It is a rule of the common law, founded on natural justice, that no man shall be prejudiced by evidence which he had not the liberty to cross-examine; and though it be insisted that the act intended to make an exception, in this instance, to the rule of the common law, yet the act has not expressly said so, and we will not, by implication, derogate from the salutory rules established by the common law.

So the deposition was rejected.

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

State v. . Webb, 2 N.C. 103 (N.C. Ct. App. 1794).

2 N.C. 103 (State v. . Webb) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Lester
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2023
Doe v. Brandeis University
177 F. Supp. 3d 561 (D. Massachusetts, 2016)
State v. McLaughlin
786 S.E.2d 269 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2016)
Chavez v. State
213 P.3d 476 (Nevada Supreme Court, 2009)
Rankins v. Commonwealth
237 S.W.3d 128 (Kentucky Supreme Court, 2007)
State v. Jensen
2007 WI 26 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2007)
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld
548 U.S. 557 (Supreme Court, 2006)
Davis v. Washington
547 U.S. 813 (Supreme Court, 2006)
Contreras v. State
910 So. 2d 901 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld
344 F. Supp. 2d 152 (District of Columbia, 2004)
State v. Lewis
603 S.E.2d 559 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2004)
Crawford v. Washington
541 U.S. 36 (Supreme Court, 2004)