Commonwealth v. Powers

116 Mass. 337, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 101
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided November 9, 1874·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Morton, J.

At the trial it appeared that a keg containing whiskey was seized under a search warrant, upon the premises alleged to have been occupied by the defendant. The only question presented to us is as to the admissibility of the testimony of the officers who made the seizure, that there was a United States revenue stamp upon the keg bearing the date of “August 17, 1873.” We are of opinion that this testimony was properly admitted. It was competent for the government to put in evidence a description of the keg seized, including a description of the tags, labels or stamps upon it. This was proper for the purpose of identifying the keg seized. Commonwealth v. Blood, 11 [339] Gray, 74. Commonwealth v. Morrell, 99 Mass. 542. Commonwealth v. Jennings, 107 Mass. 488.

The fact that such description tended to contradict the witness Riley, and to show that the whiskey seized was not the same whiskey which he testified that he bought in June, 1873, does not render the testimony incompetent, or make it necessary to produce in court the keg or the revenue stamp pasted upon it.

¡Exceptions overruled.

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

Commonwealth v. Powers, 116 Mass. 337, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 101 (Mass. 1874).

116 Mass. 337 (Commonwealth v. Powers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Roosevelt v. Eckard
17 Abb. N. Cas. 58 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1885)
Commonwealth v. Brown
124 Mass. 318 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1878)