Legal Opinion

State v. Seaburg

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided October 7, 1958PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.

The respondent was indicted for alleged violations of R. S. (1954), c. 134, § 12. He demurred with accorded right to plead anew. His demurrer was overruled and he excepts.

The indictment contains eight counts encompassing, overall, accusations that the respondent had resided in, occupied and remained in, a certain house for the purpose of lewd ness, i.e., in the main, the taking of indecent liberties with male persons, and had engaged in such lewdness.

In support of his exceptions the respondent phrases his contentions in these words:

“This indictment is bad because the acts alleged as being…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jenness v. StateSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1949
  2. State v. MunseySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1916
  3. State v. DaySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1933
  4. Rhodes v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1945
  5. State v. MorinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1927

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. MillettSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
  2. State v. Fantastic Fair & Karmil Merchandising Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1961
  3. State v. Karmil Merchandising Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1962
  4. State v. BellinoSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API