Commonwealth v. Cheney
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a scire facias, sued upon a recognizance entered into by the defendant, before a justice of the peace for the county of Suffolk, conditioned for his appearance before the next Municipal Court to be holden in Boston, to answer to the commonwealth, for selling mixed liquors, part thereof being spirituous, without being duly licensed. The defendant demurred generally to the declaration, and the demurrer was joined on behalf of the commonwealth.
Read the full summary
This was a scire facias, sued upon a recognizance entered into by the defendant, before a justice of the peace for the county of Suffolk, conditioned for his appearance before the next Municipal Court to be holden in Boston, to answer to the commonwealth, for selling mixed liquors, part thereof being spirituous, without being duly licensed. The defendant demurred generally to the declaration, and the demurrer was joined on behalf of the commonwealth. Several exceptions were taken by the counsel for the defendant; and particularly that the justice had no authority to compel him to recognize…
1Opinion of the CourtParsons, C. J.
The reasoning of the counsel for the commonwealth would be conclusive, if the statute creating the offence liad not so appropriated the forfeiture, and prescribed the mode of recovering it, as by necessary implication to exclude this offence.
The offender may be prosecuted either by indictment or by an information qui tam; and whichever prosecution is first commenced, to that shall the offender answer, and he is not liable to answer afterwards to the other. The prosecution by information is commenced by the filing of the information, and the prosecution by indictment is commenced by the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Austin v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1849
- Knowles v. DavisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1861
- Osborn v. SargentSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1844