Commonwealth v. Cunningham
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Indictment for larceny of a horse and wagon. At the trial in the superior court, before Pitman, J., the only question was one of identity, whether the prisoner was the person who stole the horse and wagon.
Read the full summary
Indictment for larceny of a horse and wagon. At the trial in the superior court, before Pitman, J., the only question was one of identity, whether the prisoner was the person who stole the horse and wagon. The witnesses called by the Commonwealth testified that they saw a man driving off the stolen wagon on the day the theft took place; that they did not notice that the man had an “ imperial ”; and that a few days afterwards they separately and without any suggestion picked out the prisoner from among others in the station-house, as the man they thought they saw on the wagon; but that they…
1Opinion of the CourtAmes, J.
The only question that appears to have been in controversy was whether the defendant was sufficiently identified as the person who committed the crime charged in the indictment. The general circumstances of the transaction were not in dispute. Upon this question of identity, the evidence offered was all of it competent, and proper for the consideration of the jury. It is impossible to say that it had no tendency to convict the defendant. Its sufficiency was to be estimated and weighed exclusively by them. It is not necessary that any one witness should distinctly swear that the defendant was…
2Cited by34 opinions
- Commonwealth v. DevlinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1957
- Commonwealth v. GalvinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1948
- Commonwealth v. RichmondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- People v. WallerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Commonwealth v. SharpeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.