R v Davis and another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1835 |
| Date | 01 January 1835 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 172 E.R. 1196
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER
Referred to, R. v. Wiley, 1850, 2 Den. 37; R. v. Laurent, 1898, 62 J. P. 250.
[177] rex v. davis and another. (II prisoners be charged by several indictments with receiving stolen goods :-Sembte, that, in strict law, any receiving that was before the one in the indictment which is being tried may be given in evidence, although itself the subject of another mdietEieait; but, if given in evidence, the other indictment ought, as matter of eandaur, to be given up. Wrhen, beiore the committing magistrate, one of * See the cases of Rex v. Hearne, ante, vol. iv p 215 ; Rex v Clewes, id. 221 ; and Rex v. Fletcher, id. 250. (a) See the case of Rex v. Savage, ante, vol. v. p. 143 ; and see ante, p. 165. 6 CAB. & P. 178. REX V. BENNETT 1197 the prisoners was examined as a witness against the other, and, after being examined, was charged as a prisoner :-Held, that what the prisoner said before the magistrate as a witness could not be given in evidence against her on her trial for the offence. It makes no difference whether a receiver receives for the purpose of profit or advantage, or whether he does it to assist the thief.) [Referred to, R. v. Wiley, 1850, 2 Den. 37 ; R. v. Lament, 1898, 62 J. P. 250.] The prisoners, who were father and daughter, the former being a pawnbroker at Cheltenham, were indicted as receivers on several indictments, which charged them with receiving sheets and various articles of linen, the property of Thomas Liddell, the proprietor of Liddell's Hotel, at Cheltenham. It appeared that the goods laid in the first indictment were found, together with many other goods of the prosecutor, at the house of the elder prisoner, marked with his mark. Gurney, B.-A particular line is now fixed upon All is evidence with a view to the ^cienter. There is no excluding the evidence of the other articles being found ; but I do not think you should go farther. As far as you have now gone, it is regular, that is, that a number of other things with the prosecutor's marks upon them were found. It was then proposed to prove that the two prisoners had received the articles into pawn, at various times Gurney, B.-Any pawnings that were before those laid in the indictment are evidence. It was proposed to give evidence of the pawning of another article which was the subject of another indictment Gurney, B.-I hestitate very much...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Queen v John Wiley
... ... 765 , R. v Davis, 6 C & P 178, pet Gurney B. , R. v. Richardson, 6 C & P 336, per Taunton J The right to bring trespass or trover is inapplicable as a test, for the ... If the goods had been removed by the thieves from one part of the owner's premises to another part of those premises and there left, and the prisoner had taken them from the latter place jointly with the thief, he would have been jointly ... ...
-
The Queen v Thomas Byrne and Catherine Byrne
...135. R. v. WileyENRUNK 1 Den. C. C. 37; 20 L. J. M. C. 4. R. v. DringENR 1 Dears. & B. 329. R. v. Dunn 1 Moo. C. C. 146. R. v. DavisENR 6 Car. & P. 177. R. v. Messingham 1 Moo. C. C. 257. R. v. Archer 1 Moo. C. C. 143. R. v. LangmeadENR L. & C. C. C. 427. R. v. HughesUNK B. C. C. 242; 29 L.......
-
The Queen v George Gillis
...60. The Queen v. M'HughUNK 7 Cox Cr. C. 483. Rex v. Berrigan Ir. Cir. R. 177. The Queen v. LewisENR 6 Car. & P. 161. Rex v. DavisENR 6 Car. & P. 177. Rex v. WheelyENR 8 Car. & P. 250. Rex v. OwenENR 9 Car. & P. 238. Rex v. BentleyENR 6 Car. & P. 148. Rex v. Lamb 2 Leach Cr. L. 559. The Quee......