Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 Va. Cas. 262

Commonwealth v. Ray

General Court of Virginia

Decided June 13, 1812

General Court of Virginia · decided 1812-06-13

<p>Husband and Wife—Joint Indictment against.—Husband and wife may be joined in an indictment for tbe same offence.</p> <p>Same—Same—Damages Assessed Separately.*—Joint damages ought not to be assessed against two defendants, although husband and wife, and for the same offence; but should be assessed against each defendant separately.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1812-06-13

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently November 1894

3 state decisions

10181218201830184018501860187018801890decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The defendants were jointly indicted in the Superior Court of law for Bedford county, for an assault and battery committed on T. Minor. They pleaded jointly “not guilty,” and the jury found the following verdict. “We of the jury find the defendants 263 guilty and ^assess their fine to one hundred dollars.” They moved to arrest the judgment for these reasons, “that the husband and wife ought not to be joined in an indictment for the same offence. 2d. That joint damages ought not to be assessed against two defendants, but that the jury ought to have assessed the amercement against each, according to the degree of their offence.”

¶2*69The case was adjourned on this motion, and the general court, June 13th, 1812, present judges Nelson, White, Stuart, Holmes, Brockenbrough, Semple, Johnston, Smith and Randolph, decided “that the first reason alleged in arrest of judgment, is insufficient to arrest it, it being lawful to join a husband and wife in such indictment; but that the second cause assigned is sufficient, because the fine ought to be assessed against each defendant separately.”

¶3See 1st Call, p. 555. Jones v. The Commonwealth.

/1/vacas/262 · .json · Public domain