Ex parte Bennett
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia
Upon the return of the habeas corpus, in behalf of N. V. H. Bennett, it appeared that he was committed by virtue of the following warrant: “ District of Columbia, Washington county, ss.
Read the full summary
Upon the return of the habeas corpus, in behalf of N. V. H. Bennett, it appeared that he was committed by virtue of the following warrant: “ District of Columbia, Washington county, ss. “ Whereas, on the information of Samuel C. Raymond on oath, it has been made to appear that N. V. H. Bennett, now before me, being accused of having feloniously stolen and taken away from four to five hundred dollars in bank-notes the property of one N. Wood ; and wearing apparel, to wit: one pair of blue ribbed pantaloons, two shirts, &e., the property of J. Scott, on examination and search made, one pair of…
1Opinion of the Court
The CouRT
(nem. con.) discharged the prisoner on the ground of the want of a seal, and the informality of the warrant, and did not recommit him, because there was no evidence that he had committed any offence in the District of Columbia.
The prisoner was afterwards arrested again and committed upon a charge of stealing lottery tickets and a penknife, from B. O. Tyler, in this county, and was again brought before the Court by habeas corpus, when Mr. C. C. Lee and Mr. Jones, for the prisoner, contended that although the commitment be perfectly regular and formal, and states that the party is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dixon v. Corporation of WashingtonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1830