State v. City of Bangor

38 Me. 592
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1854
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

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.

Bluebook
State v. City of Bangor, 38 Me. 592 (Me. 1854).

Opinion

Shepley, C. J.

— 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.

Tenney, Howard and Appleton, J. J., concurred.

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

Related

United States v. Zisblatt
172 F.2d 740 (Second Circuit, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
38 Me. 592, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-city-of-bangor-me-1854.