¶1unanimously, the judgment was reversed, on the ground, that the qualification required by statute is the having a freehold estate actually rated in the common list at nine dollars ;■ and that the having such estate rateable in the list at that sum is not sufficient.
2 Day 504
State v. Woodruff
Decided July 1, 1807
Supreme Court of Connecticut · decided 1807-07-01
In the Court belowj J- HIS was a prosecution before a justice, on the corn-plaint of a grand-juror, for unlawfully voting in the town meeting of Durham, on the 10th of… Held: that the jury could not be discharged, the only reason for discharging them was, that the prosecutor was not prepared with evidence ;—none are cases where the jury could not agree. X It maybe objected that one cannot be twice tried, or put on trial, for the same offence. But such is not the rule.
Cited by 1 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1904
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1807-07-01
View the full empirical analysis of this case →