Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. O'Brien

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 25, 1925PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBraley, J.

The defendant having been acquitted on the indictment for forgery, his exceptions are confined to the indictment for conspiracy, on which he was found guilty. The indictment charged that the defendant and George A. Hastings and Robert O. Sears conspired together to steal the property, moneys, goods and chattels of George C. Lee, who could be found by the jury to have been a member of the banking firm of Lee, Higginson and Company, doing business in Boston, but only the defendant and Hastings were tried as Sears had not been arrested.

The defendant offered no evidence and the case was submitted…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. DyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
  2. Attorney General v. TuftsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  3. Commonwealth v. CoeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
  4. Levi v. RubinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. DiStasioMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  2. Commonwealth v. RiesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1958
  3. Commonwealth v. O'ConnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2003
  4. Davis v. MeenanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API