The King v. John Lukens

1 U.S. 5, 1 Dall. 5
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided April 1, 1762·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

It often happens that all the Witnesses necessary to support a public Prosecution are brought unwillingly to give Evidence; and the Act could never intend there should be a Prosecutor indorsed, *6 unless there was really a Prosecutor existing, for the Words in the Act are, the Prosecutor. And as no Person in the present Case is proved to be active in carrying on the Prosecution, the Defendant must plead to the Indictment without any Indorsement.

It was then moved, that the Defendant himself might be sworn to prove the Person prosecuting; but denied by the Court, who said it must be proved by indifferent Witnesses.

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

The King v. John Lukens, 1 U.S. 5, 1 Dall. 5 (1762).

1 U.S. 5 (The King v. John Lukens) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Com. v. Brown, K.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2014
Ferguson v. Georgia
365 U.S. 570 (Supreme Court, 1961)
Commonwealth v. Zavaglia
12 Pa. D. & C. 529 (Schuylkill County Court of Quarter Sessions, 1929)
Commonwealth v. New Bethlehem Borough
15 Pa. Super. 158 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1900)