Commonwealth v. Haskell
2 N.E. 773, 140 Mass. 128, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 298
Opinion
Whether any inference could be fairly drawn from the failure of the defendant to produce the testimony of York, his partner, under the circumstances of the case, was for the jury to determine. The court rightly refused to rule, as matter of law, as requested by the defendant, that “ it was the duty of the government, rather than of the defence, to hold him as a witness.” There is no law which required the government, rather than the defendant, to hold or call him as a witness.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Commonwealth v. Haskell, 2 N.E. 773, 140 Mass. 128, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 298 (Mass. 1885).
2 N.E. 773 (Commonwealth v. Haskell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Dillon v. State
119 N.W. 352 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1909)
Closson v. Bligh
83 N.E. 263 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1908)
Commonwealth v. Goldstein
62 N.E. 378 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1902)
Brock v. State
123 Ala. 24 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1898)
State v. McGahey
55 N.W. 753 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1893)
Robinson v. Woodford
16 S.E. 602 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1892)