Commonwealth v. Kelley

42 N.E. 573, 165 Mass. 175, 1896 Mass. LEXIS 209
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedJanuary 4, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 42 N.E. 573 (Commonwealth v. Kelley) 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. Kelley, 42 N.E. 573, 165 Mass. 175, 1896 Mass. LEXIS 209 (Mass. 1896).

Opinion

Field, C. J.

No exception was taken at the time to the remarks of the presiding justice to the jury when they came into court to receive further instructions, and the defendant is not entitled as of right to have his objections to the remarks considered, although exceptions might have been taken on a motion for a new trial if the motion had been denied. Kullberg v. O'Donnell, 158 Mass. 405. However, exceptions having been allowed, we have examined them, and we see no error of law in what was done and said by the justice presiding at the trial.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Related

Commonwealth v. Rollins
241 N.E.2d 809 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1968)
Commonwealth v. Venuti
52 N.E.2d 392 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1943)
People v. Dixon
21 N.Y. Crim. 45 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1907)
Sigsbee v. State
43 Fla. 524 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1901)
Commonwealth v. House
6 Pa. Super. 92 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
42 N.E. 573, 165 Mass. 175, 1896 Mass. LEXIS 209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-kelley-mass-1896.