The Case of Crozier

Superior Court of Delaware

The Case of Crozier

1 Del. 33

Superior Court of Delaware·Decided July 5, 1832·Published

Opinion

Habeas Corpus.

The petitioner was committed on execution process from a justice of the peace. The objection was to the form of the mittimus.

The Act of Assembly authorizes the detention of a prisoner on a certified copy of the writ of execution. The process upon which deft, was detained, was a printed blank warrant, filled up by the constable, and indorsed “committed May, 7, 1832, by Jno. Rudolph, cons’t.”

The court discharged the prisoner on the ground, that this was not a certificate that it was a copy of the original execution.

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

Habeas Corpus.

The petitioner was committed on execution process from a justice of the peace. The objection was to the form of the mittimus.

The Act of Assembly authorizes the detention of a prisoner on a certified copy of the writ of execution. The process upon which deft, was detained, was a printed blank warrant, filled up by the constable, and indorsed “committed May, 7, 1832, by Jno. Rudolph, cons’t.”

The court discharged the prisoner on the ground, that this was not a certificate that it was a copy of the original execution.

The Case of Crozier, 1 Del. 33 (Del. Ct. App. 1832).

Pincite

1 Del. 33 (The Case of Crozier) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.