Bryan v. State
Supreme Court of Georgia
Constitutional law. Witness. Before Judge Harrell. Randolph Superior Court. May Term, 1870. Bryan, A. J. Moye and N. M. Weaver, were required by rule to appear before the Superior Court and show cause why they should not be fined for a neglect of their duties as road commissioners of said county. They answered and were at issue with the State; they were tried jointly. The solicitor general proposed to examine said Bryan as a witness for the State.
Read the full summary
Constitutional law. Witness. Before Judge Harrell. Randolph Superior Court. May Term, 1870. Bryan, A. J. Moye and N. M. Weaver, were required by rule to appear before the Superior Court and show cause why they should not be fined for a neglect of their duties as road commissioners of said county. They answered and were at issue with the State; they were tried jointly. The solicitor general proposed to examine said Bryan as a witness for the State. Defendant's counsel contended that this was a criminal proceeding, and that Bryan could not be compelled to testify against himself. The Court…
1Opinion of the Court
McOay, J.,
It has been from time immemorial a settled principle of the common law, that no one shall be compelled to answer answer any question as a witness, tending to criminate himself or to subject him to a fine or forfeiture, or any crimiual charge: 1 Greenleaf Ev., page, 620, 621. Our evidence A.ct of 1866, Code, section 3798, making all persons competent and compellable to be witnesses, contains substantially the same principle. The words used are: “No person shall be compellable to answer any question tending to criminate himself or herself.”
It is true this is not exactly a criminal…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Coonce v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
- Fuller v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2000
- Thomas v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934