Commonwealth v. Mullen

97 Mass. 545
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1867
StatusPublished
Cited by32 cases

This text of 97 Mass. 545 (Commonwealth v. Mullen) 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. Mullen, 97 Mass. 545 (Mass. 1867).

Opinion

Bigelow, C. J.

The statute which allows a defendant in a criminal case, at his own request and not otherwise, to testify in bis own behalf, (St. 1866, c. 260,) expressly provides that “ he shall be deemed a competent witness; ” that is, competent not for a special purpose, or to give evidence only which shall operate in his own favor, but competent to testify to any facts relevant and material to the issue. Like all other witnesses, he is to tell the truth and the whole truth concerning any matter proper to be inquired about. If he offers himself as a witness, he waives his constitutional privilege of refusing to furnish evidence against himself, and may be interrogated as a general witness in the cause.

The objection founded on the course of the examination of the defendant at the trial is untenable. The order of the introduction of evidence and the time when questions relating to new matters may be put are within the discretion of the presiding judge, to the exercise of which no exception lies.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Related

Commonwealth v. Judge
650 N.E.2d 1242 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1995)
Commonwealth v. Goldman
480 N.E.2d 1023 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1985)
Harrison v. State
345 A.2d 830 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1975)
Jones v. Commonwealth
99 N.E.2d 456 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1951)
Opinion of the Justices to the Senate
300 Mass. 620 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1938)
Tucker v. United States
5 F.2d 818 (Eighth Circuit, 1925)
Steen v. First Nat. Bank
298 F. 36 (Eighth Circuit, 1924)
State v. Fogg
119 A. 799 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1923)
People v. Prevost
189 N.W. 92 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1922)
Commonwealth v. Rollins
136 N.E. 360 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1922)
State v. Smith
188 P. 644 (Montana Supreme Court, 1920)
People v. Román
18 P.R. 217 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1912)
Pueblo v. Román
18 P.R. Dec. 219 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1912)
State v. Shockley
80 P. 865 (Utah Supreme Court, 1905)
People v. Dupounce
94 N.W. 388 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1903)
State v. Kent
67 N.W. 1052 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1896)
Brown v. Walker
161 U.S. 591 (Supreme Court, 1896)
Commonwealth v. Smith
40 N.E. 189 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1895)
Commonwealth v. Moore
38 N.E. 1120 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1894)
Quintana v. State
16 S.W. 258 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 Mass. 545, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-mullen-mass-1867.