Lowry v. Thompson
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtMacIntyre, J.
Under tbe common law, “When the grand jury *72have heard the evidence, if they think it a groundless accusation, they used formerly to indorse on the back of the bill, ‘ignoramus’; or, we know nothing of it: intimating, that though the facts might possibly be true, that truth did not appear to them; but now, they assert in English more absolutely, ‘not a true bill’; or (which is the better way) ‘not found’; and then the party is discharged without further answer. But a fresh bill may afterwards be preferred to a subsequent grand jury.” 4 Chitty’s Blackstone, 305. An act approved January 29,…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Phillips v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Chatten v. SniderIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
- Davis v. . BoweNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Gibson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
- Christmas v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1874
3Cited by6 opinions
- William Whirl v. C. v. (Buster) Kern and Fidelity and Deposit Company of MarylandCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- State v. GriffinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1997
- Curcio v. SandersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
- William Whirl v. C. v. (Buster) Kern and Fidelity and Deposit Company of MarylandCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Roberts v. RobertsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.