State v. Crowell
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Ckowelu was indicted as a common seller, at retail, of rum, brandy, &c. without license. At the trial before RedtNGton, District Judge, the County Attorney requested the Judge to rule, that if Crowell would rely upon his having been licensed, it was incumbent on him to prove it.
Read the full summary
Ckowelu was indicted as a common seller, at retail, of rum, brandy, &c. without license. At the trial before RedtNGton, District Judge, the County Attorney requested the Judge to rule, that if Crowell would rely upon his having been licensed, it was incumbent on him to prove it. With a view to have the law upon this point settled, the Judge ruled, that it was not incumbent on the government to prove that the accused had not a license; and instructed the jury, that as Crowell had not attempted to prove, that he was licensed, they might consider that he was not. The verdict was guilty, and…
1Opinion of the Court
*173The opinion of the Court was by
TenN.ey J.
Tiie Judge of the District Court instructed the jury, “ that it was not incumbent on the government to prove that the defendant had not a license.”
The authorities upon the question here presented are not in perfect harmony ; much of the seeming conflict, however, may arise from the want of a clear distinction between the necessity of the negative averment in the declaration or indictment, and the proof in support of such averment. The general rule is, “that when a person is required to do a certain act, the omission of which would make him guilty of a…
2Cited by6 opinions
- State v. RoweSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1968
- People v. SwinefordMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- State v. . WoodlySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1855
- City of Chicago v. WoodAppellate Court of Illinois · 1887
- State v. McPheeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1955
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.