Commonwealth v. Campbell

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Commonwealth v. Campbell

30 N.E. 72, 155 Mass. 537, 1892 Mass. LEXIS 368

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedFebruary 24, 1892

StatusPublished

Cited by17 cases

This text of 30 N.E. 72 (Commonwealth v. Campbell) 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.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Campbell, 30 N.E. 72, 155 Mass. 537, 1892 Mass. LEXIS 368 (Mass. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Barker, J.

1. The crime charged was committed in October, 1889. We cannot say that upon the question of identity evidence as to the defendant’s personal appearance in 1887, or at the time of his arrest in 1891, was too remote. Commonwealth v. Quinn, 150 Mass. 401, 404.

2. The court erred in permitting Watts to testify to the whole of his conversations with the defendant. The government should have been allowed to introduce only such portions of the conversations as pertained to the alleged offence. Not only was the witness not so restricted, but he was allowed to [539]*539testify to separate conversations with the defendant, having no relation to the crime charged, and apparently introduced with the sole purpose of showing that the defendant was a notorious criminal. Commonwealth v. Keyes, 11 Gray, 323, 325. Straw v. Greene, 14 Allen, 206. Dale v. Wooldredge, 142 Mass. 161, 184.

Exceptions sustained.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Barker, J.

1. The crime charged was committed in October, 1889. We cannot say that upon the question of identity evidence as to the defendant’s personal appearance in 1887, or at the time of his arrest in 1891, was too remote. Commonwealth v. Quinn, 150 Mass. 401, 404.

2. The court erred in permitting Watts to testify to the whole of his conversations with the defendant. The government should have been allowed to introduce only such portions of the conversations as pertained to the alleged offence. Not only was the witness not so restricted, but he was allowed to [539]*539testify to separate conversations with the defendant, having no relation to the crime charged, and apparently introduced with the sole purpose of showing that the defendant was a notorious criminal. Commonwealth v. Keyes, 11 Gray, 323, 325. Straw v. Greene, 14 Allen, 206. Dale v. Wooldredge, 142 Mass. 161, 184.

Exceptions sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 N.E. 72, 155 Mass. 537, 1892 Mass. LEXIS 368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-campbell-mass-1892.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack