Commonwealth v. Kiley

23 N.E. 55, 150 Mass. 325, 1889 Mass. LEXIS 94
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedDecember 31, 1889
StatusPublished
Cited by34 cases

This text of 23 N.E. 55 (Commonwealth v. Kiley) 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. Kiley, 23 N.E. 55, 150 Mass. 325, 1889 Mass. LEXIS 94 (Mass. 1889).

Opinion

Knowlton, J.

In Commonwealth v. Gorham, 99 Mass. 420, 422, it was said that “ the term ‘ conviction’ is used in at least two different senses in our statutes. In its most common use it signifies the finding of the jury that the prisoner is guilty ; but it is very frequently used as implying a judgment and sentence of the court upon a verdict or confession of guilt.” The statutes referred to in that case fully sustain the statement in the opinion. ■

The St. of 1887, c. 392, provides that “the conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction of a person licensed under the provisions of chapter one hundred of the Public Statutes, for violation of any of the provisions of said chapter, and the several acts in amendment thereof, shall of itself make the license of said person void.” Under this provision, the effect of a conviction of the kind named is to deprive the defendant of a valuable right, without an opportunity for further trial or investigation. We are of opinion that nothing less than a final judgment, conclusively establishing guilt, will satisfy the meaning of the word “ conviction ” as here used. At any time before a final judgment of the court, a motion in arrest of judgment may be made, or the verdict may be set aside upon a motion for a new trial, on the ground of newly discovered evidence, or for other good cause; and, upon further proceedings, it may turn out that the defendant is not guilty.

[327]*327At the time of the sale relied on in the present case, the verdict of the jury in the former trial had not been followed by a judgment, and the defendant had not been convicted within the meaning of this statute. Verdict set aside.

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

Related

John Doe No. 124357 v. Sex Offender Registry Board
31 Mass. L. Rptr. 312 (Massachusetts Superior Court, 2013)
Pack v. Osborn
881 N.E.2d 237 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2008)
State Board of Retirement v. Woodward
446 Mass. 698 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2006)
State v. Cartwright
418 P.2d 822 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1966)
Pino v. Nicolls (Two Cases)
215 F.2d 237 (First Circuit, 1954)
Pino v. Nicolls
119 F. Supp. 122 (D. Massachusetts, 1954)
Commonwealth v. Hersey
85 N.E.2d 447 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1949)
People ex rel. Ingenito v. Warden & Agent of Auburn Prison
267 A.D. 295 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1943)
People v. La Sasso
182 Misc. 538 (New York County Courts, 1943)
In Re Chambers
285 N.W. 862 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1939)
State ex rel. Hunter v. Jurgensen
280 N.W. 886 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1938)
State Medical Board v. Rodgers
79 S.W.2d 83 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1935)
People Ex Rel. Marcley v. Lawes
172 N.E. 487 (New York Court of Appeals, 1930)
State Ex Rel. Wilson v. Baird
288 P. 1 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1930)
Donnell v. Board of Registration of Medicine
149 A. 153 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1930)
Attorney General v. Pelletier
240 Mass. 264 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1922)
Nichols v. City of Cleveland
247 F. 731 (Sixth Circuit, 1917)
Kardo Co. v. Adams
231 F. 950 (Sixth Circuit, 1916)
Mutual Film Co. v. Industrial Commission
215 F. 138 (N.D. Ohio, 1914)
State v. Pishner
81 S.E. 1046 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
23 N.E. 55, 150 Mass. 325, 1889 Mass. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-kiley-mass-1889.