Commonwealth v. Kenney
This text of 115 Mass. 149 (Commonwealth v. Kenney) 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
The whole evidence upon which this verdict was rendered is not reported. We cannot see that the evidence objected to was not admissible in the discretion of the presiding judge, as having a tendency, not too remote, to prove one or more of the propositions necessary to the defendant’s guilt.
A description of the premises as they were some few months before, with no evidence of change, would have a tendency to show that they were used for the same purpose.
[150]*150The fact unexplained that the defendant was conveying at the same time in the same wagon other jugs of liquor to other persons engaged in its unlawful sale, would as one circumstance tend to prove that the defendant had reasonable cause to believe that the liquor transported by him was intended for sale contrary to law. Commonwealth v. Commeskey, 13 Allen, 585. Briggs v. Rafferty, 14 Gray, 525. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
115 Mass. 149, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-kenney-mass-1874.