Criminal Law · MBE-tested
The King v. Phillip Henry Rapp
1 U.S. 91 Dall. 9·Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·1764·PA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
The King v. Phillip Henry Rapp.
Continuance.
[MAJORITY]
Indictment for misdemeanor, in marrying a man to a woman who had another husband living. Moved, on the part of the defendant, to put off the trial, on affidavit of material witnesses wanting, and that he had taken the proper steps to get them. Opposed by the attorney-general, as being a criminal case, and not within the rules .of civil eases. But granted By the Court, the defendant being a clergyman, and his living depending on his acquittal: but declared not to be a precedent.
In Rex v. D’Eon, 3 Burr. 1513, the court said, that in all cases, whether criminal or civil, a trial shall not be hurried on, so as to do injustice to the defendant.