Commonwealth v. Gagle
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Complaint for keeping intoxicating liquors with intent unlawfully to sell the same in this Commonwealth. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Sherman, J., the jury returned a verdict of guilty.
Read the full summary
Complaint for keeping intoxicating liquors with intent unlawfully to sell the same in this Commonwealth. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Sherman, J., the jury returned a verdict of guilty. The defendant then filed a motion to set aside the verdict, for the reason that, “ after the said cause was committed to the jury, and while the jury were deliberating on ' the case, the jury were allowed to separate, and did separate without agreeing on a verdict, and afterwards reassembled in the jury-room and deliberated further upon the case, and after-wards agreed upon a verdict.” At the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the' Court.
Upon the facts of this case the Superior Court was not required, as matter of law, to set aside the verdict. It was within the discretion of that court to permit one of the jurors to remain in the jury-room under charge of an officer while the other jurors went for their supper. It was a temporary separation for a sufficient cause, which in no way prejudiced the rights of the defendant.
Exceptions overruled.
2Cited by6 opinions
- People v. . Dunbar Contracting Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Commonwealth v. HedenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Reilly v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- Chemical Electric Light & Power Co. v. HowardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Commonwealth v. EdgertonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.