Commonwealth v. Bagdasarian
This text of 153 N.E. 452 (Commonwealth v. Bagdasarian) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The testimony of the officer was properly admitted in evidence. Commonwealth v. Kimball, 7 Gray, 328.
[249]*249If properly admitted upon any ground, the evidence could be used for any purpose, unless its use was expressly limited by the court. Pegg v. Warford, 7 Md. 582. State v. Farmer, 84 Maine, 436, 440. See Higlister v. French, 180 Mass. 299, 301. Hubbard v. Allyn, 200 Mass. 166, 171.
In Commonwealth v. Harwood, 4 Gray, 41, cited by the defendant, the statements excluded were not made upon the premises nor by an inmate. That decision has no application here.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
153 N.E. 452, 257 Mass. 248, 1926 Mass. LEXIS 1321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-bagdasarian-mass-1926.