Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Rowe
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided October 13, 1926PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWait, J.
Arthur W. Rowe and Lemuel Rowe were indicted by the Grand Jury for the Suffolk District in eleven counts .for larcenies. The amounts alleged to have been stolen in counts 5, 6, 8, 9 and 11, equalled or exceeded $100 in value and were less than $100 in value in the remaining counts. Under our statutes, therefore, the offences charged were felonies in the former and misdemeanors in the latter counts. G. L. c. 266, § 30.
These defendants were at the same time charged in another indictment with conspiring to steal — a misdemeanor. They pleaded not guilty to both indictments when arraigned, and…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Schick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Cancemi v. . the PeopleNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Crocker v. Justices of the Superior CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Hallinger v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Parker v. SimpsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Patton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Commonwealth v. MillenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Commonwealth v. BellinoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
- Commonwealth v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1970
- Commonwealth v. BorisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.