Commonwealth v. Connors
This text of 116 Mass. 35 (Commonwealth v. Connors) 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
In the first of these cases, evidence that the defendant kept a common nuisance on any day between July 2, 1872, and May 1, 1873, was competent, and the government was not'confined to July 2 in its proof. The conviction is a bar to any other indictment for the same offence between the days named. But it is not a bar to the indictment in the second case for keeping a common nuisance between May 1, and the time of finding the indictment in June following. Evidence that would have been competent on the one indictment would not have been competent on the other. Distinct offences are charged in each indictment, and the same evidence could not convict in both cases. Commonwealth v. Wood, 4 Gray, 11. Commonwealth v. Armstrong, 7 Gray, 49. Commonwealth v. Keefe, 7 Gray, 332. Commonwealth v. Traverse, 11 Allen, 260. Morey v. Commonwealth, 108 Mass. 433.
The evidence was properly admitted in the first case, and the demurrer to the defendant’s plea in the second properly sustained. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
116 Mass. 35, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-connors-mass-1874.