State v. Cunningham

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. Cunningham

31 Me. 355

CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine

DecidedJuly 1, 1850

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 31 Me. 355 (State v. Cunningham) 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. Cunningham, 31 Me. 355 (Me. 1850).

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 Me. 355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cunningham-me-1850.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack