State v. Williams
Supreme Court of Louisiana
It is immaterial in the present case, to enter into a discussion of the formerly much vexed question, whether the Supreme Court can constitutionally exercise criminal appellate jurisdiction. The contemporaneous interpretation of the constitution, followed up by an uniform current of decisions of this court during a period of twenty-nine years, has put this question at rest. Be this, however, as it may, the question does not arise on this occasion.
Read the full summary
It is immaterial in the present case, to enter into a discussion of the formerly much vexed question, whether the Supreme Court can constitutionally exercise criminal appellate jurisdiction. The contemporaneous interpretation of the constitution, followed up by an uniform current of decisions of this court during a period of twenty-nine years, has put this question at rest. Be this, however, as it may, the question does not arise on this occasion. “ The Legislature has made no provision for the exercise of such jurisdiction” by this court. The only question which the case presents is, whether…
1Opinion of the CourtBullard, J.
My opinion remains unchanged by the new arguments adduced for the defendant; and I think the appeal ought to be dismissed, for the reasons stated in my first opinion.
Morphy, J.
" When this case was last before the court, I concurred in the opinion entertained by a majority of my colleagues ; but further reflection having brought me to a different conclusion, it is proper that I should state briefly the grounds on-which it rests. I deem it unnecessary to go into the inquiry, whether this court can constitutionally exercise appellate criminal jurisdiction. My individual impression has always…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cummins v. WaldenIndiana Supreme Court · 1837
- Nooe v. BradleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1832