State v. Honora Conway

The petition for new trial in this case is based upon certain alleged errors of the Common Pleas Division, in admitting testimony relating to an indictment against the defendant, which had been previously found, and to which the defendant had entered a plea of nolo contendere. At the trial of the case the attorney-general was permitted to ask the following questions, against the objection of defendant’s counsel, viz.: “This was not your first offence, was it ? ” . . . . . “Are you the Honora Conway who plead nolo contendere to an indictment for nuisance on the 16th of October, 1893, and who…