Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

17 Del. 302

State v. Bower

New York Court of General Session of the Peace · decided 1898-05-21

The defendant was indicted for resisting a public officer. At the trial the State called David W. Cush, the prosecuting witness, who was asked by the Deputy Attorney-General what was the occasion of his going to the house of the defendant. The witness proceeded to state in reply that he had an execution against her husband.

Decided 1898-05-21

Rore, C. J:—

¶1The execution is his only authority. What the witness may say has nothing to do with it. He says he was authorized and had a right to be there. The defendant says he had not, and the only way to show that he had a right to be there is to produce the paper by which that authority is shown.

¶2The testimony later developed that the prosecuting witness first put his hands upon the defendant, and the State thereupon entered a nolle prosequi.

/17/del/302 · .json · Public domain