State V.byers

Tennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity

State V.byers

2 Tenn. 110

CourtTennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity

DecidedOctober 6, 1815

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Tenn. 110 (State V.byers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State V.byers, 2 Tenn. 110 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1815).

Pincite

Opinion

Indictment for horse-stealing. — It was argued by HAYWOOD for the State that every felony included a trespass, and therefore if the jury should not be of opinion that a felony was committed they might find the defendant guilty of a trespass.

WHITE e contra. — No authorities were cited on either side, and the Court inclined to adopt the principle in Haywood's argument.

ORIGINAL NOTE. — The Court took up a wrong impression in this case. The better opinion is in Kel. 29, referred to in East's Cr. Law, 737, 778; viz., that a person indicted for grand larceny cannot be found guilty of a trespass, but must be acquitted.

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

Indictment for horse-stealing. — It was argued by HAYWOOD for the State that every felony included a trespass, and therefore if the jury should not be of opinion that a felony was committed they might find the defendant guilty of a trespass.

WHITE e contra. — No authorities were cited on either side, and the Court inclined to adopt the principle in Haywood's argument.

ORIGINAL NOTE. — The Court took up a wrong impression in this case. The better opinion is in Kel. 29, referred to in East's Cr. Law, 737, 778; viz., that a person indicted for grand larceny cannot be found guilty of a trespass, but must be acquitted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Tenn. 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-vbyers-tennsuperct-1815.