R v Spragg and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 09 February 1760 |
| Date | 09 February 1760 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 97 E.R. 637
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
S. C. 1 Black. 209.
£930] rex versus spragg and another. Saturday, 9th Feb. 1760. [S. C. 1 Black. 209.] When conviction is removed by certiorari, no motion can be in arrest of judgment, unless the defendant be personally present. The defendants had been convicted of a conspiracy to charge a person with a capital felony: and the record of conviction had been removed up hither by certiorari ; but not the persons of the defendants. And Mr. Serj. Davy being ready on behalf of the defendants, to move in arrest of judgment; Mr. Gould, pro Rege, objected to his going on with the motion; for that the defendants ought to be personally present. And he cited the case of Rex v. Elizabeth Nichols, (2 Strange, 1227) which was exactly the same offence as this; and it was (}38 FOXCROFT V. DEVONSHIRE 2 BOBB. Ml. agreed " that after conviction, the personal presence of the defendant is necessary upon such a motion as this." Sarj, Davy, for the defendants, attempted to explain away this rule; and urged that the defendants were safe in [931] custody already, and therefore amenable to the justice of the Court; and offered that the defendants' clerk in Court should undertake to bring the defendants up, at the defendants' own expence, in case the objection should not prevail. But the secondary of the Crown-Office, being appealed to, alledged " that the rule was afi Mr. Gould had asserted." The Court held this to be a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex parte Harken
...WilkesST1 19 State Trials, 1075. R. v. HorneST1 20 State Trials, 651. R. v. M'Daniel & BerryST1 19 State Trials, 746, 749. R. v. SpraggENR 2 Burr. 930. Lord Thanet's CaseST1 27 State Trials, 822. Williams' CaseENR 1 Leach, 529. Dunn v. The QueenENR 3 Cox. 205. R. v. O'ConnellENR 7 Ir. L. Re......
-
The Queen v Charleton
...v. NicollsENR 13 East, 412. Rex v. BakerENR 13 East 414; note, Rex v. AtholENR 1 Str. 553. Rex v. BoyceENR 4 Burr. 2073. Mary SpraggENR 2 Burr. 930, 992, 1027. CRIMINAL LAW JUDGMENT RESPITED JURISDICTION OF SBSEQUENT JUDGE OF ASSIZE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT. 1839. TISDALL TISDALL. 50 CASES......
-
The King v Spraggs
...When conviction is removed by certiorari, no motion can be in arrest of judgment, unless the defendant be personally present. S. C. 2 Burr. 930. The defendant was convicted on an indictment for a conspiracy. Serjeant Davy moved in arrest of judgment, Mr. Gould objected to the regularity of ......