Case Name: The State v. Goudalock
Court: Constitutional Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1801-04
Citations: 1 Brev. 47
Docket Number: 
Parties: The State v. Goudalock.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 47–48

Head Matter:
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT,
COLUMBIA,
APRIL, 1801.
The State v. Goudalock.
Judgment arrested where the indictment had been tried in a different district from that directed by law, to which it had been transmitted, by mistake, on a new division of the judicial districts: but a new trial ordered in the proper district upon the same indictment.
An indictment for assault and battery was found at a court held for the old district of Pinckney., comprehending the present efistf' °f Union and'Spartanburg. By the judicial act of 1798/ prosecutions in criminal cases, depending in the old district courts* were to be tried in those new districts where the offences, were reSpect;ve]y committed. 2 Faust, 245,0. The offence in this case wai committed, añd so the indictment charged, in Spartanburg district, but,' by mistake, the indictment was transferred t o * 'a u d't h e d e fe n d a n ty w u s tried upon it,arid convicted, in Uniori district, A motion was made in this court to arrest the judgment on the ground of this mistake.

Opinion:
The court considered the conviction insufficient to warrant judgment, as the court, before whom the defendant was tried, had not jurisdiction in the case: and for as much as the conviction was founded on mistake ; and that mistake apparent on the face of the proceedings, the judgment was ordered to be arrested. And it waS ordered, that the defendant should be prosecuted de novo, for the* same offence, on the same indictment, in the' district within which-' the offence was committed.