State V.byers

Tennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity

State V.byers

2 Tenn. 110

Tennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity·Decided October 6, 1815·Published

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.

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

Pincite

2 Tenn. 110 (State V.byers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.