State v. Houlehan
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions by the defendant. In these cases the respondent was indicted at the September term, 1909, of the Superior Court for Kennebec County for keeping and maintaining a common nuisance.
Read the full summary
On exceptions by the defendant. In these cases the respondent was indicted at the September term, 1909, of the Superior Court for Kennebec County for keeping and maintaining a common nuisance. The material parts of the indictments are as follows:—That Peter A. Houlehan, of Farmingdale, in the County of Kennebec, at Gardiner, in said County of Kennebec, on the first day of January, A. D. 1907, and on diverse other days between said day and the day of finding this indictment, a certain tenement occupied by the said Peter A. Houlehan ás a storehouse, situated in said Gardiner, unlawfully did use…
1Opinion of the CourtBird, J.
These two cases, against the same defendant, upon identical indictments for nuisance between the first day of January 1907 and the day of the finding of the indictment, are before us upon exceptions. The defendant was tried upon one of the indictments (No. 33) and found guilty and was immediately tried upon the other indictment (No. 32) with like result.
In the case first tried it is necessary to consider but one of the exceptions. The State offered as tending to prove the crime set forth in the indictment the docket entries of the Gardiner Municipal Court as follows:—“State v. Peter Houlehan.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Norris v. DoniphanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1863
- Campbell v. HowardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
3Cited by8 opinions
- Gagne v. Inhabitants of City of LewistonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1971
- Nissenbaum v. StateSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1938
- Cote v. CummingsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1927
- State v. SchumacherSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1953
- Kaye v. Keeper of the JailSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.