Legal Opinion
People v. Quanstrom
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided October 4, 1892PublishedCited by 24 opinions
Exceptions before judgment from Muskegon. (Dicker-man, J.) Respondent was convicted of the crime of bigamy. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMcGrath, J.
Respondent was convicted of bigamy, and the sole question in the case is whether a complaint for bigamy may be made by the first wife. It is well established that one not a competent witness against the person charged is not competent to make a complaint against him, so that the real question is whether, in a criminal action for bigamy, the first wife is a competent witness.
Our statute (How. Stat. § 7546, as amended by Act No. 211, Laws of 1885) is as follows:
“ A husband shall not be examined as a witness for or against his wife without her consent, nor a wife for or against her husband'…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bassett v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- State v. SloanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
- State v. HughesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
- State v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1860
- Lord v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1885
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- State v. KollenbornSupreme Court of Missouri · 1957
- People v. WarrenMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
- People v. LoveMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
- State v. ChambersSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
- Chamberlain v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1960
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.