{
  "id": 8728045,
  "name": "State vs. Biscoe",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Biscoe",
  "decision_date": "1852-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "683",
  "last_page": "684",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "12 Ark. 683"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 124,
    "char_count": 1823,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.401,
    "sha256": "c4d32b0acb23195ffcff881a0ca53800ca0ea8b9ba8bea618f0b08bc0e941300",
    "simhash": "1:4beec145e15e6f0e",
    "word_count": 316
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:49:49.158040+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "State vs. Biscoe."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": ".Mr. Justice S.corr\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThis record presents no case for the decision of this court, but .simply a dry abstract point of law.\nThe writ of error must be dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": ".Mr. Justice S.corr"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      ".Clendenen, Attorney General for the State."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "State vs. Biscoe.\nThe grand jury of Phillips Circuit Court communicated to the judge thereof certain questions which a witness summoned before them had refused to answer, on the ground that his anawers would tend to criminate himself, and asked the opinion of the judge as to whether he was bound to answer them \u2014 the judge decided that ]ie was not, the attorney for the State excepted to the decision, took a bill of exceptions setting out the facts and brought error: Held, That the record presented no case for the decision of this Court, but simply an abstract point of law, and the wilt of error was therefore dismissed.\nJVrit of Error to Phillips Circuit Court.\nThe transcript in this case shows, that during- the November term, 1849, of the Phillips Circuit Court, the grand jury, through their foreman, made a communication to the presiding judge, Hon. John T. Jones, to the eifccf that they had propounded certain questions to James H. Neil, a witness summoned before them, as to his knowledge of Henry L. Biscoe having played and bet at certain games of cards, which the witness refused to answer on the ground that his answers might tend to criminate himself; and the grand jury asked the opinion of the court as to whether the witness was bound to answer the questions. The court decided that he could not be compelled to answer the questions submitted, having stated on oath that his answers thereto would tend to criminate himself \u2014 to which decision of the court, the attorney for the State excepted, took a bill of exceptions setting out the facts, and brought error.\n.Clendenen, Attorney General for the State."
  },
  "file_name": "0683-03",
  "first_page_order": 683,
  "last_page_order": 684
}