¶1The number of witnesses summoned seems extravagant. We would not encourage the practice of the public prosecutor’s permitting the man who institutes the prosecution, to summon as many as he pleases. This case is in some respects of a singular nature. There were seven defendants, and they were connected with others not defendants. The court will therefore allow the costs of twenty-six, witnesses, double the number sworn, provided the counsel can name so many, who in their opinion were material.
3 Binn. 414
Commonwealth v. Wood
Decided April 1, 1811
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1811-04-01
Costs of double' the number of witnesses sworn, allowed under special circumstances, provided the counsel in the cause could name so many whom their opinion tvere material. THIS was an indictment against Wood and six other journeymen hatters, for a conspiracy.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 1944
2 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1811-04-01
View the full empirical analysis of this case →