United States v. Watson

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

United States v. Watson

28 F. Cas. 501, 7 Blatchf. 60, 1869 U.S. App. LEXIS 1400

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedNovember 25, 1869

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 28 F. Cas. 501 (United States v. Watson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Watson, 28 F. Cas. 501, 7 Blatchf. 60, 1869 U.S. App. LEXIS 1400 (circtsdny 1869).

Pincite

Opinion

BENEDICT, District Judge.

I have had occasion to examine into the question as to the right of the district attorney, representing the government, to have the motion made by him in this case granted. The subject was before the court of queen’s bench, in England, in the case of Reg. v. Allen, 5 Law T. Rep. [N. S.] 636, and it was there held that such a motion, when made, must be granted. While I have no doubt that, in a case calling for such action, the court might decline to grant the motion until the government should have had sufficient time to protect itself against collusion, yet, aside from this, I am of opinion that the motion, when made before verdict, must be granted, as a matter of right. The motion now made is, therefore, granted.

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

BENEDICT, District Judge.

I have had occasion to examine into the question as to the right of the district attorney, representing the government, to have the motion made by him in this case granted. The subject was before the court of queen’s bench, in England, in the case of Reg. v. Allen, 5 Law T. Rep. [N. S.] 636, and it was there held that such a motion, when made, must be granted. While I have no doubt that, in a case calling for such action, the court might decline to grant the motion until the government should have had sufficient time to protect itself against collusion, yet, aside from this, I am of opinion that the motion, when made before verdict, must be granted, as a matter of right. The motion now made is, therefore, granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 F. Cas. 501, 7 Blatchf. 60, 1869 U.S. App. LEXIS 1400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-watson-circtsdny-1869.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack