Commonwealth v. Lincoln
This text of 110 Mass. 410 (Commonwealth v. Lincoln) 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 conviction of Seneca Lincoln was rightly ruled to be incompetent evidence upon the trial of this indictment, except upon the question of his credibility as a witness. 1st. Because it was res inter alios, the present defendant not having been a party to that case. The King v. Warden of the Fleet, 12 Mod. 337, 339; S. C. Holt, 133, 135. Gibson v. McCarty, Cas. temp. Hardw. 311. Brownsword v. Edwards, 2 Ves. Sen. 243, 246. Patterson v. Gaines, 6 How. 550, 586. Mead v. Boston, 3 Cush. 404, 407. 1 Greenl. Ev. § 537. 2d. Because, if admitted, it had no tendency to prove that the assault by Seneca upon the defendant was prior to the defendant’s assault upon him. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
110 Mass. 410, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-lincoln-mass-1872.