State v. Weeks

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. Weeks

30 Me. 182

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1849·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Shepi.ky, C. J. orally.

— There was error in the instruction, that it was of no importance whether Weeks owned the dam or not, also in the instruction, that the defendant might be convicted, although the dam was not owned by Morse. The ownership by Morse, being alleged, must be proved. The in[184] struction dispensed with such proof, and authorized a conviction, even if the dam was not owned by Morse, but was owned by Weeks himself. Exceptions sustained.

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

Shepi.ky, C. J. orally.

— There was error in the instruction, that it was of no importance whether Weeks owned the dam or not, also in the instruction, that the defendant might be convicted, although the dam was not owned by Morse. The ownership by Morse, being alleged, must be proved. The in[184] struction dispensed with such proof, and authorized a conviction, even if the dam was not owned by Morse, but was owned by Weeks himself. Exceptions sustained.

State v. Weeks, 30 Me. 182 (Me. 1849).

Pincite

30 Me. 182 (State v. Weeks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related