United States v. Pignel

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

United States v. Pignel

27 F. Cas. 538, 1 Cranch 310

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedJune 15, 1806

StatusPublished

This text of 27 F. Cas. 538 (United States v. Pignel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Pignel, 27 F. Cas. 538, 1 Cranch 310 (circtddc 1806).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT

(nem. con.) instructed the jury that if they should be of opinion, from the evidence, that Venable, the constable, was in the general execution of his office as a conservator of the peace, and as such endeavoring to suppress the affray, then it is not necessary to produce the warrant spoken of by the witness. But if the jury should be of opinion that he was only endeavoring to execute the warrant, then the warrant must be produced, or its non-production satisfactorily accounted for.

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

THE COURT

(nem. con.) instructed the jury that if they should be of opinion, from the evidence, that Venable, the constable, was in the general execution of his office as a conservator of the peace, and as such endeavoring to suppress the affray, then it is not necessary to produce the warrant spoken of by the witness. But if the jury should be of opinion that he was only endeavoring to execute the warrant, then the warrant must be produced, or its non-production satisfactorily accounted for.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 F. Cas. 538, 1 Cranch 310, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-pignel-circtddc-1806.