State v. Pinckney
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Memminger, J., Colleton, August, 1905. Indictment against Tobe Pinckney for selling property under lien. From order affirming judgment of magistrate, defendant appeals. cites: Question of jurisdiction may be raised at any time: 19 S. C., 218. And can not be waived: 53 S. C., 198. Magistrate had no> jurisdiction: Crim.
Read the full summary
Before Memminger, J., Colleton, August, 1905. Indictment against Tobe Pinckney for selling property under lien. From order affirming judgment of magistrate, defendant appeals. cites: Question of jurisdiction may be raised at any time: 19 S. C., 218. And can not be waived: 53 S. C., 198. Magistrate had no> jurisdiction: Crim. Code, sec. 337. cites: Objection to jury after one sworn comes too> late: Code 1902, 2046. If there be any evidence to¡ suslam verdict, it will not be disturbed: 1 S. C., 1; 11 S. C., 195. As to jurisdiction of magistrate: Crim. Code, sec. 336.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Woods.
The défendant was convicted in a magistrate’s court of selling cotton upon which he had given an agricultural lien. On appeal the Circuit Court held the magistrate had commited no error except in imposing' an unduly severe sentence, which was accordingly modified.
1 By his first exception, the defendant insists the judgment should be reversed because the magistrate assisted the constable in preparing the list from, which the jury was drawn. The record discloses no facts on this subject except the statement in the report of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State v. PerrySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1911
- State v. GistSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1960