Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

11 Tenn. 588

Black v. State

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1832

Tennessee Supreme Court · decided 1832-08-15

It is not competent for a defendant indicted for forcibly taking' property from the possession of another, to show title to the property taken, upon the trial oí the indictment. When two or more persons claim a negro, and she is in the possession of one of them, the other cannot take her by violence; if he do, he is liable to be indicted.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1970

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1832-08-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Peck, J.

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2We are of opinion, the evidence offered was properly rejected. The circuit judge, in the charge to the jury, has given the proper reasons for it. With the charge of the court we accord. Men are not permitted to redress tfteir own wrongs, or to restore themselves to lost rights at their own will and pleasure; others have rights also. The process of the law and the courts, are open to them, and to these resort must he had, not to force and acts of violence. 2 Tenn. Rep. 97. It was supposed that the indictment did not show a possession of the house by Marshall, at the time of the entry; that is not so. The bill charges, that he was then and there possessed of the house, and that the negro, with force and arms, with clubs, knives, &c. was taken from and out of the house, and out of the possession of said Marshall. It is a sufficient indictment, and the charge of the court to the jury, and the opinion upon the admission of the evidence offered being correct, the judgment is affirmed.

¶3Judgment affirmed.

/11/tenn/588 · .json · Public domain