State v. City of Bangor
This text of 38 Me. 592 (State v. City of Bangor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
— After verdict a motion was made in arrest of judgment, for a cause not apparent from a record of the case, but requiring proof to be made by the introduction of the record of another case.
A motion in arrest of judgment can be entertained only for matters apparent upon an inspection of the record. Bangor Bank v. Treat, 6 Greenl. 207; Root v. Henry, 6 Mass. 504; Watt's case, 4 Leigh, 672; State v. Heyward, 2 Nott & McCord, 312; Gardner v. The People, 3 Scam. 83; Steward v. The State, 13 S. & M. 573.
It is not therefore necessary to consider, whether the objection would have been effectual, if it had been properly and seasonably presented. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
38 Me. 592, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-city-of-bangor-me-1854.