Commonwealth v. Plummer

18 N.E. 567, 147 Mass. 601, 1888 Mass. LEXIS 172
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided November 26, 1888·Published

Opinion

Morton, C. J.

We need not discuss the question whether the Commonwealth would be barred from prosecuting a person for an offence by the fact that the attorney general, district attorney, or other prosecuting officer had promised such person immunity, upon calling him as a witness in the prosecution of another person for the same offence, or one connected with it. Such question is not raised in the case at bar, because there is nothing to show that the city marshal made any promise to the defendant, express or implied, that he should be protected from prosecution. Commonwealth v. Brown, 103 Mass. 422. Commonwealth v. Denehy, 103 Mass. 424, note.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Commonwealth v. Plummer, 18 N.E. 567, 147 Mass. 601, 1888 Mass. LEXIS 172 (Mass. 1888).

18 N.E. 567 (Commonwealth v. Plummer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Brown
103 Mass. 422 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1869)