Commonwealth v. Welsh

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Commonwealth v. Welsh

54 N.E. 841, 174 Mass. 327, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 922

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedOctober 18, 1899

StatusPublished

This text of 54 N.E. 841 (Commonwealth v. Welsh) 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. Welsh, 54 N.E. 841, 174 Mass. 327, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 922 (Mass. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Lathrop, J.

The record in this case shows that the defendant was,duly tried and found guilty on, October 1,1898, by the First District Court of Southern Worcester, and ordered to pay a fine of $50, and that he stand committed until the same be paid.. The record further shows that the defendant appealed. This appeal was necessarily “to the Superior Court [328]*328then next to be held in the same county.” Pub. Sts. c. 155, § 58. This, by the St. of 1897, c. 490, § 3, was the first Monday in October. There is nothing in the record to show that he did not so appear. The only ground alleged in the motion for arrest of judgment is, that the District Court ordered him to recognize with sureties for his appearance before the Superior Court next to be holden at Worcester, on the first Monday in November, 1898, and he did so recognize. But such an error in the order of the court or in the recognizance is no ground for a motion in arrest of judgment. The case is very similar in this respect to Commonwealth v. Campion, 105 Mass. 184. See also Commonwealth v. Sullivan, 11 Gray, 203; Commonwealth v. Lynch, 14 Gray, 383 ; Commonwealth v. Leighton, 7 Allen, 528; Commonwealth v. Russell, 147 Mass. 545.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Lathrop, J.

The record in this case shows that the defendant was,duly tried and found guilty on, October 1,1898, by the First District Court of Southern Worcester, and ordered to pay a fine of $50, and that he stand committed until the same be paid.. The record further shows that the defendant appealed. This appeal was necessarily “to the Superior Court [328]*328then next to be held in the same county.” Pub. Sts. c. 155, § 58. This, by the St. of 1897, c. 490, § 3, was the first Monday in October. There is nothing in the record to show that he did not so appear. The only ground alleged in the motion for arrest of judgment is, that the District Court ordered him to recognize with sureties for his appearance before the Superior Court next to be holden at Worcester, on the first Monday in November, 1898, and he did so recognize. But such an error in the order of the court or in the recognizance is no ground for a motion in arrest of judgment. The case is very similar in this respect to Commonwealth v. Campion, 105 Mass. 184. See also Commonwealth v. Sullivan, 11 Gray, 203; Commonwealth v. Lynch, 14 Gray, 383 ; Commonwealth v. Leighton, 7 Allen, 528; Commonwealth v. Russell, 147 Mass. 545.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 N.E. 841, 174 Mass. 327, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-welsh-mass-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack