State v. . Jones
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This is an application for a certiorari to review the action of Bryan, J., in refusing to discharge the petitioners on habeas corpus. Notice was given as required by Rule 43 of this Court, the time being shortened by consent of the Attorney General. The petitioners filed’a certified copy of the record and proceedings as a part of their application.
Read the full summary
This is an application for a certiorari to review the action of Bryan, J., in refusing to discharge the petitioners on habeas corpus. Notice was given as required by Rule 43 of this Court, the time being shortened by consent of the Attorney General. The petitioners filed’a certified copy of the record and proceedings as a part of their application. From them it appears that.the petitioners were arrested and brought before a Justice of the Peace upon an affidavit aDd warrant-for unlawfully disposing of mortgaged property under The Code, §' 1089, and. upon the trial the .Justice bound them over…
1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.
(after stating the case): The learned counsel for the petitioners properly and frankly admitted that this was a case of “ novel impression.” The continuance of the hearing till the next morning was not subject to exception. It is difficult to see how it injured the petitioners who were admitted to bail, or how, if injurious, this could be remedied by an appeal. It is res acia and cannot be undone. Besides, the delay was to give the Solicitor opportunity to examine into the case, and was expressly authorized by The Code, § 1635.
Upon the return of the Sheriff it appeared that the petitioners…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. . HerndonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re HuberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- State v. McColleySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1905
- Ex parte MartinCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1932