Legal Opinion

State v. Kingsbury

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 1, 1870PublishedCited by 10 opinions

On exceptions, and motion for new trial because of disqualification of two of the jurors. Indictment under R. S., c. 119, § 3. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. In support of the motion, cited McAllister v. Sibley, 25 Maine, 474; Studley v. Hall, 22 Maine, 198; State y. Webster, 13 N. H. 491; Com. v. Hoby, 12 Pick. 519; People y. Mather, 4 Wend. 229; Troxdale v. State, 9 Humph. 411; Wiggin y. Plummer, 11 Foster, 251; Willis v. People, 32 N. Y. 715 ; People y.

Read the full summary

On exceptions, and motion for new trial because of disqualification of two of the jurors. Indictment under R. S., c. 119, § 3. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. In support of the motion, cited McAllister v. Sibley, 25 Maine, 474; Studley v. Hall, 22 Maine, 198; State y. Webster, 13 N. H. 491; Com. v. Hoby, 12 Pick. 519; People y. Mather, 4 Wend. 229; Troxdale v. State, 9 Humph. 411; Wiggin y. Plummer, 11 Foster, 251; Willis v. People, 32 N. Y. 715 ; People y. Plummer, 9 Cal. 298; Nesmith y. Clinton F. Ins. Co., 8 Abbott, 141; Foster v. Brooks, 6 Geo. 287; Riley v. State, 9 Humph.…

1Opinion of the CourtAppleton, C. J.

The defendant was indicted for inciting, procuring, hiring, etc., one James Kitchen to set fire to a certain meeting-house, — the property of the Second Baptist Church in China, and erected for public use, whereby said meeting-house was burnt and consumed.

The testimony of Kitchen is not reported, but as there was a conviction, he must, probably, have testified to the facts set forth in the indictment.

To contradict his statements, the defendant offered the testimony of his wife, from which it appeared that Kitchen, on the evening of the fire, returned from Augusta with the defendant, who had…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. MatherNew York Supreme Court · 1830
  2. Freeman v. PeopleNew York Supreme Court · 1847
  3. People v. BodineCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
  4. Ex parte VermilyeaNew York Supreme Court · 1826
  5. Durell v. MosherNew York Supreme Court · 1811

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. PullenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1970
  2. State v. MathesonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
  3. State v. NortonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1955
  4. State v. FranzenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1983
  5. Denver City Tramway Co. v. LomovtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1912

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

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

Powered by the Exa API