State v. Haskell
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions from superior court. Complaint for cruelty to animals made before the municipal court of Augusta where the respondent appealed from the decision of the municipal judge. The opinion states the case. cited: Oom. V. Lufkin, 7 Allen, 579 ; Com. v. Thornton, 113 Mass. 457; Oom. v. McLellan, 101 Mass. 34; Oom. v. Whitman, 118 Mass. 458. cited: Bishop, Crim.
Read the full summary
On exceptions from superior court. Complaint for cruelty to animals made before the municipal court of Augusta where the respondent appealed from the decision of the municipal judge. The opinion states the case. cited: Oom. V. Lufkin, 7 Allen, 579 ; Com. v. Thornton, 113 Mass. 457; Oom. v. McLellan, 101 Mass. 34; Oom. v. Whitman, 118 Mass. 458. cited: Bishop, Crim. Pro. § § 189-193; State v. Burgess, 40 Maine, 592; State v. Smith, 61 Maine, 386; Oom. v. Tuck, 20 Pick. 356; State v. Hood, 51 Maine, 363; Oom. v. Holmes, 119 Mass. 195.
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, C. J.
The complaint containing a single count, is demurred to for duplicity. It is contended that at least two offenses are set out in the one count. The complaint recounts that the defendant did, a horse belonging to himself, " cruelly and unlawfully torment, torture, maim, beat, wound, and deprive of necessary sustenance.” Thus far the complaint is not amenable to the objection alleged. Thus far only one offense is charged. But it is alleged to have been accomplished by different means. Proof that any of the means were used proves the offense. Proof that all the means described were used proves…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Commonwealth v. WhitmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. SanfordWashington Supreme Court · 1916