Legal Opinion
State v. Brunson
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided August 15, 1791PublishedCited by 2 opinions
IueoRmation for a forgery. It was determined, that tho person in whose name the instalment is forged, cannot he a witness to prove the forgery. Also, that comparison of the handwriting of the party, is admissible evidence in a criminal prosecution; and like all other evidence to be left to the triers to weigh and consider.
1Opinion of the Court
*308In an information v. B. Howard, for a forgery; Bradway, in whose name the note was forged, was not admitted to testify, although the note had been found by judgment of court not to be his note. Windham, March Term, 1789.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Lyon v. LymanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1831
- People v. DeanNew York Supreme Court · 1826