State v. Alexander.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Wilkes. This was an indictment against the defendant for per-, jury, alleged to have been committed on the trial of a warrant by a magistrate. The defendant, on the trial below, before Nash, Judge, was convicted, and moved for a new trial on the ground that the oath alleged to be false was coram nonjudice, as the warrant was void.
Read the full summary
From Wilkes. This was an indictment against the defendant for per-, jury, alleged to have been committed on the trial of a warrant by a magistrate. The defendant, on the trial below, before Nash, Judge, was convicted, and moved for a new trial on the ground that the oath alleged to be false was coram nonjudice, as the warrant was void. The warrant was in these words: You are hereby commanded to take the body of Randolph Alexander, if to be found in your county, and cause him to appear before some Justice of the Peace for said county, to answer the complaint of Jésse Gambill. in a plea of debt…
1Opinion of the Court
"You are hereby commanded to take the body of Randolph Alexander, if to be found in your county, and cause him to appear before some justice of the peace for said county, to answer the complaint of Jesse Gambill in a plea of debt of $45, due by open account, and a hundredweight of bar iron. Herein fail not."
The judge refused the new trial, and from the sentence pronounced defendant appealed. The three acts of Assembly first passed for the purpose of increasing the jurisdiction of single magistrates all employ the same language, viz., "debts and demands, where the balance due on any specialty,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Davis v. . WattersSuperior Court of North Carolina · 1802