Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-01-26
|gR JEOPARDY.
!. Hurt's Opinion on the
l...,on for a Rehear-
/. ' ,Ss Powell Case
oOiriOn Of the court Of APP
Ioipg Jeopardy Sustained
b. the UOult'

By the OO"s
I'M Is the full text OF the
lnSee Hurt OF the court OF
.,ss states motion for a re-
ss case Of Bud Powell We.
6oesled from Atascosa coun-
Isbus OF the original opin'
the last Austin term,
the columns of THE
LING the spring Of 1884.
~ ~ that opinion is re-
!. sTnstained in this.
|.nar -On the 10Th day OF
w. ~, csse was reached for
a a,5ss announced ready, ?
nsnelcd and sworn, and the
issded mot guilty" The
',oeonsider OF their verdict,
YSo,,t IN hour and q half,
~ aunt and reported that
", sgree. The court Init
!, "a, willing to discharge
,ttorney for the defense
T n were sent back, and,
M hour longer, returned
IA stated that they could
Srree. The defendant be-
NJ was willing for the jury
rsed. answered that he
.os. and objected to the dis
M jury. The court dis
sh6 aud the defendant
nof RECEPTIONS.
n dsy the case was again
III aud, q Jury being inn
sworn, the defendant In
Isl mis- plea Of former
and the plea OF mot
seatered by the court, the
dug mute. The evi.
4 introduced, argument OF
nd, and the charge submit
N returned into court a YER
In, and assessed the punish
% years confinement in the
y, and the defendant APP
court at Austin. AT the
nch of this court the case
and the Judgment was re-
B the prosecution was dis
fhe assistant attorney gen
motion for rehearing, ask
Burt to review its decision
! the judgment OF the court
! very carefully reviewed the
sised on the plea of formel
|and instead of being at al
the reasoning and conclu
bed In the opinion of Presid
Whites fuller investigation
highly confirmed us in thu
be soundness OF each propo
ounced in the opinion.
bed and firmly settled in oul
pD, that: "Noperson for thi
|nse shall be twice put in
pf his life or liberty; nor shall
Be again put upon trial fol
pffense, after a verdict OF no
|acourt of competent juris
kinportant question is, wher
bn, Ia u legal sense, put h
~ This heing ascertatned
fppOsilion announced in tn
I Presiding Judge White i
lblt; which is, that IL is be
power Of the legislature to in
ID declare the meaning Of
ionsl provision. The follow
pilties support this PROPOSE
Cooley's Const. Linn =, a ed)
p; ID. 10; Fletcher vs. Peck
1875; 10 Wheat. 46; Green
GIeenough, II Pa st., 494; |
] Ark, $40; 16 Pa. st. 26t
|; 10 Fla, 238; z Ohio, 81; |
4; Is N Y, 432; 6 Ind, 5lt
~ Crlhoun VS.. McLindor
PSI Gs Pa st. as; 80 ID, l3-
lsoi u Wheat, las; 10 Miss
!, 526.
return to the first, and til
question. When is a pei
led in q legal sense, put In jeol
udge Story, in the Perez cast
jeopardy had not attache
lhe prisoner chad not bee
4 nor acquitted And in tn
Re, 2Sumner, 10, he holds th'
upon application of the d.
tecause OF the constitution
mat no person, for the san
lail be twice put in leopard
. liberty, could not award Il
q new trial. In the PER-
learned judge holds that IL
" has the discretion to di
pelury over the objections
hsf, aud that such discretiC
'le revised by the appella
that the prisoner ms
Ns on trial Under the Gibl
y The trial judge may ha'
WY principle of law ia h
~ s,ldence, or his charge
oi1he prosecution may ha'
- PERJURY, or the subornatiC
~ looJlain the conviction
0ilutate prisoner, no reli
sisI ted by the courts, by
~ The error in this propoi
lslsls in viewing the COZ sit
' WI, as a weapon for Il
~ yen asa shield 10 the pr
nc think Judge Story is al
\ Y Ar Justice Davis, in II
~ isa q his dissenting opinion;
!, q y a person convicted of
Snense, put on trial aga
'ss.,salnly be embraced by I
.ne article; and yet, In 4
~ ~ question, 1t would not pl
- within its true intent a
That article Ia the amer
~, s5e constitution, correspor
,a'e OF the common law,
, 70 !. me prevailing spirit a
y. Of those amendments q,