Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

8 Ind. 467

Israel v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 16, 1857

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1857-01-16

<p>APPEAL from the Jasper Circuit Court.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1857-01-16

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently March 2003

11 state decisions

301857186018701880189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Perkins, J.

¶1Indictment for a felony, trial, and acquittal. Motion to tax the fees of the defendant’s witnesses against the State. Motion overruled. The only question made in the cause is upon the denial of said motion. It is contended that the statute of 1855 requires such taxation of costs; but we do not think it should be so construed (1).

¶2It is further contended that the Court should have *468^axe<^ ^e cosfs under that provision of the constitution which declares that, “ no man’s particular services shall demanded without just compensation.” But we do not think so. The old constitution contained a like provision, but we believe it never was understood to extend to witnesses in criminal trials, and the provision in the new constitution should not be so understood. Ve do not propose to go into a discussion, with a view to a definition of “particular sendees;” but we are prepared to say, that the services of witnesses in criminal cases are not particular, but are of the class of general services which every man in community is bound to render for the general, as well as his own individual good. It is as much the duty and interest of every citizen to aid in prosecuting crime, as it is to aid in subduing any domestic or foreign enemy; and it is equally the interest and duty of every citizen to aid in furnishing to all, high and low, rich and poor, every facility for a fair and impartial trial.when accused; for none is exempt from liability to accusation and trial. These are matters of general interest and public concern, — are vital, indeed, to the very existence of free government, and render the services of witnesses on such occasions matters of general public interest, and not particular, in the sense of the constitutipn (2).

B. H. Milroy, D. Donald, and A. G. Porter, for the appellant (3).Per Curiam.

¶3The judgment is affirmed with the costs of this motion.

¶4 Laws of 1855, p. 312, s. 17, and p. 114, s. 26.

¶5 Const. Ind. art. 1, s. 21.

/8/ind/467 · .json · Public domain