Commonwealth v. Smith
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Indictment for subornation of peijury. At the trial in the superior court, the jury returned a verdict of guilty, which was set aside on the defendant’s motion, as against the evidence, and for newly discovered evidence.
Read the full summary
Indictment for subornation of peijury. At the trial in the superior court, the jury returned a verdict of guilty, which was set aside on the defendant’s motion, as against the evidence, and for newly discovered evidence. At the next term, the defendant, having given previous notice of his intention, appeared and demanded a new trial, but Russell, J., permitted the attorney for the government to enter a nolle prosequi, against the objection and protest of the defendant, who, contending that he was entitled to have a jury pass upon the case, alleged exceptions.
1Opinion of the CourtBigelow, C. J.
It having been adjudged by competent authority that the verdict heretofore rendered in this case was founded upon insufficient evidence, and that additional evidence, material to the issue, has been newly discovered, that verdict has been set aside and a new trial ordered. The case therefore now stands to be determined in like manner as if no trial had taken place and no verdict had been rendered against the defendant. The question raised by the exceptions thus resolves itself into the single inquiry whether, after an indictment has been found and returned into court, and before any…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wood v. PrescotiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1806
3Cited by9 opinions
- Attorney General v. TuftsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- People ex rel. Hoyne v. NewcomerIllinois Supreme Court · 1918
- State Ex Rel. Griffin v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1953
- State ex rel. Thrash v. LambSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- State v. CharlesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1937
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.