State v. Neagle

65 Me. 468, 1876 Me. LEXIS 89
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided May 4, 1876·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Walton, J.

Upon the trial of one charged with having in his possession intoxicating liquors with intent to sell the same in violation of law, the record of a previous conviction of a similar offense is admissible in evidence upon the question of intent. So decided in State v. Plunkett, 64 Maine, 534.

And the docket entries may be read to the jury, when a more extended record has not been made. Leathers v. Cooley, 49 Maine, 337. Pierce v. Goodrich, 47 Maine, 173. Longley v. Vose, 27 Maine, 179. Read v. Sutton, 2 Cush., 115. Pruden v. Alden, 23 Pick., 184.

Irregularity in the drawing of jurors is not a ground for setting aside a verdict, unless it appears that the party moving to have the verdict set aside was injured by the irregularity. R. S., c. 82, § 78. R. S., c. 134, § 20. No such injury appears in this case.

Exceptions overruled.

Judgment on the verdict.

Appleton, C. J., Dickerson, Barrows, Yirgin, Peters and Libbey, JJ., concurred.

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

State v. Neagle, 65 Me. 468, 1876 Me. LEXIS 89 (Me. 1876).

65 Me. 468 (State v. Neagle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Christian v. State
268 A.2d 620 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1970)
State v. Emery
255 A.2d 898 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1969)
State v. Jamerson
449 P.2d 542 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1969)
Witters v. United States
106 F.2d 837 (D.C. Circuit, 1939)
Combs v. Commonwealth
188 S.W. 326 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1916)