Commonwealth v. Dame

8 Mass. 384
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1851
StatusPublished

This text of 8 Mass. 384 (Commonwealth v. Dame) 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. Dame, 8 Mass. 384 (Mass. 1851).

Opinion

Metcalf, J.

It is said in the text books that persons convicted of treason, felony, or the crimen falsi, are incompetent to be witnesses. Roscoe on Ev. 78; 1 Greenl. on Ev. § 373. But the offence, of which Cummings was convicted, was [385]*385neither of these three, and we .nowhere find that a conviction of any other offence renders the convict incompetent to testify.

In the case of United States v. Brockius, 3 Wash. C. C. 99, it was decided that a person convicted of the crime of assault and battery with intent to murder was, nevertheless, a competent witness. That case is analogous to the present.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 Mass. 384, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-dame-mass-1851.