State v. Phipps
State v. L. A. Phipps.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
FaiR,clotii, J.
The defendant and Margaret Locklear wrere indicted for fornication and adultery.
The Solicitor entered a nolle prosequi as to Locklear and introduced her as a witness against' the defendant to prove the offence charged.
Was she a competent witness'for that purposed» the question ? She was not until the Act of 1866, Bat. Rev. eh. 43, § 14, abrogating the long settled rules of evidence, was passed which made her evidence admissible.
State v. Rose, Phil. 406.
*204 The Act of 1869-70, eh. 177, repeals the above Act in its application to criminal matters and restored the common law rule of evidence ; but a subsequent Act, 1871-2, ch. 4, repeals the latter Act, and thus restores the competency of the witness.
The policy of legislation leading to this result is a matter for the consideration of the Legislature The Court can only declare the law as it finds it.
There is no error. Let this be certified to the end that the Superior Court may proceed according .to law.
Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.