State v. Stimpson
Opinion
announced the opinion of the Court, that there was no error in the ruling and instructions of the Judge at Nisi Prius, and ordered an entry of
Exceptions overruled.
remarked, that the instructions, as applicable to the third count, are correct; as applicable to the fourth count, they would be erroneous, it not being alleged in that count, [611] that the principal larceny was committed in this State. See Commonwealth v. Andrews, 2 Mass. 14.
As to this doctrine of constructive larceny, I do not feel at all satisfied; and, if it were a new question, I should be opposed to it. On principle, it is, in my judgment, erroneous ; and, being so, should not be extended.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
45 Me. 608 (State v. Stimpson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.