Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

5 Day 175

State v. Smith

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 15, 1811

Supreme Court of Connecticut · decided 1811-06-15

Tim prisoner having been convicted, on an indictment, before the Superior Court, for uttering ami putting off a court-tcrfcit liante Hato, made in imitation of Die notes issued by the Niw-Lruunvick i .si rile, an incorporated bank in Nm-Jer-sty, knowing it to he false and counterfeit, moved for a new trial, on iíu. severa! grounds hereafter stated in the opinion of iiiis Com í.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently July 1896

1 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1811-06-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Edmond J.

¶1dissented, on the ground, that the court could aot lawfully accumulate the terms of imprisonment; and *180that, in the present case, the commence mens of the terms of confinement, should have relation to tin: time of the con, victions, respectively.

Brainard, J. was absent when the case was argped ; andIngersom., J, having been of counsel in the cause, did ot judge.

¶2New trial not to he granted.

¶3REGULA GENERALIS.

¶4At a meeting of the Judges of the Superior Court, al Neto Haven, on the first Tuesday of June, 1811 :

¶5ORDERED, that the rule established in June, 1809, respecting the admission of attornies to practice in the Superé ■: Court, shall not extend to those, who, prior to that tint' duly entered their names in the office of any attorney, co>: formabie to the rules then existing, and who shall have regularly pursued their studies, and have been, or shall be, ad Blitted, in any of the courts of Common Pleas, in this Slab

/5/day/175 · .json · Public domain