Commonwealth v. Shea
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Indictment on the Gen. Sts. c. 87, §§ 6, 7, charging that the defendant “ did keep and maintain a certain common nuisance,” to wit, a tenement in Framingham used for the illegal sale and illegal keeping of intoxicating liquors, without having any license, appointment or authority, first duly had according to law, to keep intoxicating liquors for sale; ” and without having any license, &c., to sell intoxicating liquors.
Read the full summary
Indictment on the Gen. Sts. c. 87, §§ 6, 7, charging that the defendant “ did keep and maintain a certain common nuisance,” to wit, a tenement in Framingham used for the illegal sale and illegal keeping of intoxicating liquors, without having any license, appointment or authority, first duly had according to law, to keep intoxicating liquors for sale; ” and without having any license, &c., to sell intoxicating liquors. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Bacon, J., the defendant moved to quash the indictment for the reason that it did not set forth that the intoxicating liquors therein…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The sufficiency of the indictment and correctness of the ruling upon the burden of proof have both been repeatedly affirmed. Commonwealth v. Kennedy, 108 Mass. 292. Commonwealth v. Conneally, 108 Mass. 480.
Exceptions overruled.*
A similar decision was made June 16, 1874, in the case of
Commonwealth vs. Michael Hanley,
wrgued by the same counsel.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. KennedyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Commonwealth v. ConneallyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
3Cited by2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. GagneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Commonwealth v. CurranMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875