State v. Cunningham

31 Me. 355
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1850·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Shepley, C. J., orally.

There is no positive rule of law, that a jury may not convict upon the unsupported testimony of a particeps criminis. There may be cases, hr which an -omission, by the- Judge, to advise the jury to look with great .suspicion, on such testimony, might be deemed a neglect of duty. Each case has its peculiar circumstances, with reference ■to which the Judge should exercise a sound discretion, in advising the jury.

This case being put upon strict legal right, the

Exceptions are overruled.

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

State v. Cunningham, 31 Me. 355 (Me. 1850).

31 Me. 355 (State v. Cunningham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State of Maine v. Chad D. Lagasse
2016 ME 158 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2016)
State v. Lagasse
2016 ME 158 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2016)
State v. Smith
312 A.2d 187 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1973)