State v. Regan

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. Regan

67 Me. 380, 1877 Me. LEXIS 67

CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine

DecidedJune 1, 1877

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 67 Me. 380 (State v. Regan) 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. Regan, 67 Me. 380, 1877 Me. LEXIS 67 (Me. 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

Virgin, J.

All the objections raised by the respondent are based upon alleged defects in the warrant by virtue of which he was arrested and taken before the police court. That court had jurisdiction of the offense set out in the complaint, to which no objection is made. If the process, by virtue of which he was brought before that court, did not authorize the officer to arrest him, the respondent should have raised the objection then and there. Having appeared generally and pleaded not guilty to the complaint, as the record shows, he thereby waived all objections to matters of form in the warrant. Com. v. Henry, 7 Cush. 512. Com. v. Gregory, 7 Gray, 498. By the terms of the report, therefore, there must be

Judgment for the state.

Appleton, C. J., Walton, Dickerson, Bareows and Peters, JJ., concurred.

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

Virgin, J.

All the objections raised by the respondent are based upon alleged defects in the warrant by virtue of which he was arrested and taken before the police court. That court had jurisdiction of the offense set out in the complaint, to which no objection is made. If the process, by virtue of which he was brought before that court, did not authorize the officer to arrest him, the respondent should have raised the objection then and there. Having appeared generally and pleaded not guilty to the complaint, as the record shows, he thereby waived all objections to matters of form in the warrant. Com. v. Henry, 7 Cush. 512. Com. v. Gregory, 7 Gray, 498. By the terms of the report, therefore, there must be

Judgment for the state.

Appleton, C. J., Walton, Dickerson, Bareows and Peters, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 Me. 380, 1877 Me. LEXIS 67, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-regan-me-1877.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack