State v. Dyer
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
ON REPORT. INDICTMENT against Parmenas Dyer and Benjamin F. Morrill, under R. S. c. 124, § 8, for maliciously and without lawful justification using an instrument by forcing, thrusting, and inserting it into the body and womb of tlie wife of Morrill, with intent thereby to procure her miscarriage, she being pregnant with child. There was another count alleging that the use of the instrument was not necessary for the preservation of the life of the woman.
Read the full summary
ON REPORT. INDICTMENT against Parmenas Dyer and Benjamin F. Morrill, under R. S. c. 124, § 8, for maliciously and without lawful justification using an instrument by forcing, thrusting, and inserting it into the body and womb of tlie wife of Morrill, with intent thereby to procure her miscarriage, she being pregnant with child. There was another count alleging that the use of the instrument was not necessary for the preservation of the life of the woman. The presiding judge, in accordance with R. S. c. 134, § 26, reserved for the determination of the full court the following questions : 1. Is…
1Opinion of the CourtKent, J.
The first question presented, under the certificate of the presiding judge, made in pursuance of c. 134, § 26, R. S. 1871, is this: “ Is the wife of said Benjamin F. Morrill a competent witness against both respondents, on a joint trial of said respondents ? ”
The charge in the indictment is, in substance, that the respondents jointly intending thereby to procure the miscarriage of the wife, did use a certain instrument in the hand of Dyer, by forcing, thrusting, and inserting the said instrument into the body and womb of said Hannah, who is the wife of said Morrill.
There is no change in the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Clarke v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1897
- Commonwealth v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1921