George Shiras, Jr.

Name: Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court
Author: George Shiras, Jr.

Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by George Shiras, Jr.. It explores elements such as the United States, offense and crime.

Quotes from Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court (George Shiras, Jr.)

George Shiras, Jr., Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court

“ Remedies must always be under the control of the legislature, and it would create endless confusion in legal proceedings if every case was to be conducted only in accordance with the rules of practice, and heard only by the courts in existence when its facts arose. The legislature may abolish courts and create new ones, and it may prescribe altogether different modes of procedure in its discretion, though it cannot lawfully, we think, in so doing, dispense with any of those substantial protections with which the existing law surrounds the person accused of crime.' Chap. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

George Shiras, Jr., Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court

“ But alterations which do not increase the punishment nor change the ingredients of the offense, or the ultimate facts necessary to establish guilt, but, leaving untouched the nature of the crime and the amount or degree of proof essential to conviction, only remove existing restrictions upon the competency of certain classes of persons as witnesses, relate to modes of procedure only, in which no one can be said to have a vested right, and which the state, upon grounds of public policy, may regulate at pleasure. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

George Shiras, Jr., Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court

“ There remains to consider the contention that, in the trial in the criminal court, by the use of certain books of account belonging to them, the plaintiffs in error were thereby made to be witnesses against themselves, and thus their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States have been abridged, and they are deprived of their liberty without due process of law, contrary to the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

George Shiras, Jr., Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court

“ If diversities of laws and judicial proceedings may exist in the several states without violating the equality clause in the 14th Amendment, there is no solid reason why there may not be such diversities in different parts of the same state. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

George Shiras, Jr., Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court

“ It means that no person or class of persons shall be denied the same protection of the laws which is enjoyed by other persons or other classes in the same place and under like circumstances. The 14th Amendment does not profess to secure to all persons in the United States the benefit of the same laws and the same remedies. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

George Shiras, Jr., Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court

“ Every law that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal, and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates the crime or makes it greater than it was when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less or different testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense in order to convict the offender.'
In Cummings v. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

George Shiras, Jr., Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court

“ If every person residing or being in either portion of the state should be accorded the equal protection of the laws prevailing there, he could not justly complain of a violation of the clause referred to. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

George Shiras, Jr., Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court

“ There was certainly no error in using the defendants' own entries against them. The shoes of a party charged with crime can be taken and fitted to tracks as evidence, and in one case, when a party charged with crime was made to put his foot into the tracks, the fact that it fitted was held competent. ”

George Shiras, Jr.

Summary

Quotes from Mallett v. North Carolina — Opinion of the Court (George Shiras, Jr.)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature