Legal Opinion

Bird v. State

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided October 18, 1899PublishedCited by 14 opinions

FROM CLAIBORNE. Appeal in error from the Circuit Court of Claiborne County. ~W. R. Hicks, J.

1Opinion of the CourtCaedwele, J.

Cam Bird and William Brown are under conviction of murder in the second degree for killing Iienrv Gilbert. The indictment, as copied in the transcript, is fatally defective in that it is wanting in the indispensable indorsement, “A true bill,”' followed by the signature of the foreman of the grand jury. Code, Sec. 5093; M. & V., See. 5921; Shannon, Sec. 1055; Gunkle v. The State, 6 Bax., 626; The State v. Herron, 86 Tenn., 448; Canupp v. The State, 97 Tenn., 636.

Thus far the Attorney-general has been unable to cure the defect, as was done in the last named case by a second transcript…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. HerronTennessee Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Rose v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Hobby v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. State v. BondurantTennessee Supreme Court · 1999
  4. United States v. CrossDistrict Court, M.D. Georgia · 1981
  5. James E. Mitchell and James Nichols, Jr. v. Jim Rose, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1978

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API