United States v. Jones
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania
Indictment for piracy. The district attorney, having stated to the court, that he could not safely try this case at the present term, on account of the absence of material witnesses, whose attendance at the next court, steps were taking to procure, directed the case, with the assent of the court, to be continued.
Read the full summary
Indictment for piracy. The district attorney, having stated to the court, that he could not safely try this case at the present term, on account of the absence of material witnesses, whose attendance at the next court, steps were taking to procure, directed the case, with the assent of the court, to be continued. A motion was now made to admit the prisoners [Jones, Pickle, and Reese] to bail, upon the ground that the continuance was not made by order of the court, upon a motion for that purpose, founded, upon an affidavit of the absence of material witnesses. An additional reason was assigned…
1Opinion of the Court
WASHINGTON, Circuit Justice.
In the exercise of that discretion with which the law invests the court upon this subject, we should no doubt be greatly influenced to a favourable exercise of it, where the continuance appeared to be capricious and unreasonable on the part of the law officer of the court. But in this case, a very sufficient reason for the continuance was assigned by the district attorney; and though not verified by affidavit, the court was satisfied, and assented to the continuance. This, therefore, furnishes no good cause for bailing the prisoners. As to Jones, it js proved by…
2Cited by4 opinions
- In re LosassoSupreme Court of Colorado · 1890
- State ex rel. Hunter v. BrewsterSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1883
- State v. . HerndonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- United States v. QuirozCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2025