Commonwealth v. Cronin

69 N.E. 1065, 185 Mass. 96, 1904 Mass. LEXIS 757
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided February 25, 1904·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Barker, J.

The defendant’s statement that he would drown himself was made in private to his wife. It was relevant to his condition of mind, but was made incompetent and inadmissible as evidence in his favor by the prohibition of the statute, “Neither husband nor wife shall testify as to private conversations with each other.” R. L. c. 175, § 20, cl. 1. Fuller v. Fuller, 177 Mass. 184, and cases cited. It did not come within the reason of the exception which allows abusive language [97] addressed by a husband in private to his wife to be given in evidence to show abusive treatment. See French v. French, 14 Gray, 186.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Commonwealth v. Cronin, 69 N.E. 1065, 185 Mass. 96, 1904 Mass. LEXIS 757 (Mass. 1904).

69 N.E. 1065 (Commonwealth v. Cronin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Burnham
887 N.E.2d 222 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2008)
Brown v. State
753 A.2d 84 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2000)
Gallagher v. Goldstein
524 N.E.2d 53 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1988)
Commonwealth v. Gillis
263 N.E.2d 437 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1970)
Kaye v. Newhall
249 N.E.2d 583 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1969)
Commonwealth v. LePage
226 N.E.2d 200 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1967)
Sherry v. Moore
265 Mass. 189 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1928)