Commonwealth v. Cullins
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
The defendant was indicted for larceny. The indictment contained two counts, the first of which charged the defendant with stealing 98 handkerchiefs, of the goods and chattels of Hannah Healey; in the second count the goods stolen were alleged to belong to Walter Healey. The defendant pleaded not guilty.
Read the full summary
The defendant was indicted for larceny. The indictment contained two counts, the first of which charged the defendant with stealing 98 handkerchiefs, of the goods and chattels of Hannah Healey; in the second count the goods stolen were alleged to belong to Walter Healey. The defendant pleaded not guilty. The Attorney-General, (Sullivan,) in opening, stated that Walter Healey, the husband of Hannah Healey, had been absent six or seven years in the East Indies; that, if alive, it was not probable he would ever return; and that his wife had, for several years past, at D., in this county, been in…
1Opinion of the Court
The Court
(Strong, Sedgwick, and Thacher, justices) thought that the goods stolen could not be considered as the property of Hannah Healey, who was, in legal estimation, still the wife of Wal ter Healey, and, therefore, that the prisoner, if at all convicted, could not be found guilty of the first charge in the indictment.
It appeared in evidence that the whole number of the [ * 117 ] handkerchiefs alleged to have been stolen * were originally taken in the state of Rhode Island, seventy-six of which were traced and found by him in this county.
Sedgwick, J.,
who summed up the evidence to the jury,…
2Cited by27 opinions
- Commonwealth v. CarrollMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1971
- Commonwealth v. WhiteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- State v. SeaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1830
- State v. EllisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1819
- State v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.