Commonwealth v. Catlin

1 Mass. 8
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided September 15, 1804·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

The Court

(Strong Sedgwick, Sewall, and Thatcher, justices) were unanimously of opinion, and Strong, J., who charged thejury, stated it as the unanimous opinion of the Court, that although it might be true that the facts proved amounted to an offence, yet that they did not prove the offence charged in the indictment; that the offence charged is open gross lewdness and lascivious behavior, and nothing more: admitting every thing which has been testified to be true, there is certainly nothing more proved than secret or private lewdness and lascivious behavior, which cannot in any degree support the charge in the indictment.

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

Commonwealth v. Catlin, 1 Mass. 8 (Mass. 1804).

1 Mass. 8 (Commonwealth v. Catlin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Miguel Angel Rivera.
Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2026
Commonwealth v. Jarrod F. St. Martin
Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2024
Commonwealth v. Waterman
Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2020
Commonwealth v. Kessler
817 N.E.2d 711 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2004)
Commonwealth v. Kelley
516 N.E.2d 1188 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1987)
Commonwealth v. Ferguson
422 N.E.2d 1365 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1981)
Commonwealth v. Templeman
381 N.E.2d 1300 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1978)
State v. Foster
21 W. Va. 767 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1883)
Commonwealth v. Wardell
128 Mass. 52 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1880)
Delany v. People
10 Mich. 241 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1862)
State v. Millard
18 Vt. 574 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1846)
Grisham v. State
10 Tenn. 589 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1831)