holding J.P. is not authorized to go into neighboring precinct, where there is a qualified resident J.P., and hold a court of inquiry in the neighboring precinct
How later courts described this case
- holding J.P. is not authorized to go into neighboring precinct, where there is a qualified resident J.P., and hold a court of inquiry in the neighboring precinct
- “[A] defendant is not accused until he has been charged with an offense, and he cannot be tried until he has been arrested, and therefore a magistrate cannot sit as an examining court, or conduct an examining trial, until he has the party under arrest and before him.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BROOKS, Judge
(dissenting).—I believe that Hart v. State, supra, conclusively settles the case adversely to appellant.