State v. Morris
| Decision Date | 30 September 1806 |
| Citation | 1 Tenn. 220 |
| Parties | STATE v. MORRIS. |
| Court | Tennessee Circuit Court |
Indictment for Horse-stealing.--In this case it was decieded that a defendant in a capital case should not be obliged to disclose, upon the first application for a continuance what his witnesses would swear. Vide 1 Bl. 512.
The defendant was tried, found guilty, and executed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
3 cases
-
J. R. Watkins Medical Co. v. Martin
...1. The certificate of the Secretary of State was not admissible in evidence. Kirby's Digest, § 3058; 2 Elliott on Ev., §§ 1354-5; 1 Tenn. 220; Acts 1907, Act No. Acts 1899, 305, etc. There was no proof that appellant ever complied with the laws of Arkansas. 2. There is no error in the instr......
-
Nelson v. State
...Act 1827, ch. 30 (C. & N. 701). The defendant, by his counsel, insists here that the rule of practice settled in the case of The State v. Morris, 1 Tenn. 220, that on the first application for a continuance the defendant is not bound to disclose what his witnesses would swear, entitled him ......
- State v. Evans