Commonwealth v. Lyden
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Indictments for keeping and maintaining tenements in Lynn, used for the illegal keeping, and for the illegal sale of intoxicating liquors.
Read the full summary
Indictments for keeping and maintaining tenements in Lynn, used for the illegal keeping, and for the illegal sale of intoxicating liquors. At the trial in the Superior Court, of the first case, one John F. Brown, a state constable, testified that he had been to the tenement several times within the time charged in the indictment to serve search-warrants, and to search for liquors; that upon two occasions he found ale, and nothing else; and that upon one occasion he found, in addition to ale, three bottles, each of which contained intoxicating liquor. Upon cross-examination, the defendant…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The extent to which a witness may be cross-examined as to facts otherwise immaterial, for the purpose of testing his bias and credibility, is ordinarily within the discretion of the judge presiding at the trial. Commonwealth v. Shaw, 4 Cush. 593. Odiorne v. Bacon, 6 Cush. 185. Miller v. Smith, 112 Mass. 470. No exception lies to the refusal of the presiding judge to permit the questions proposed in each of these cases to be put, without first producing a copy of the record.
Exceptions overruled.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Miller v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
3Cited by12 opinions
- Jennings v. RooneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- State v. PfefferleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1886
- State v. PraterWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1902
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- Thayer v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.