State v. Verrill
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions'. The respondent was indicted at the January-1920 term of the Superior Court in Cumberland County for a violation of Sec. 38, of Chap. 26, of the R. S., in that on the sixth day of December, 1919, at Portland, while operating an automobile, after causing injury to one Arthur Abbott, “did go away without stopping and making himself known.” At the same term of court the respondent was found guilty by a jury.
Read the full summary
On exceptions'. The respondent was indicted at the January-1920 term of the Superior Court in Cumberland County for a violation of Sec. 38, of Chap. 26, of the R. S., in that on the sixth day of December, 1919, at Portland, while operating an automobile, after causing injury to one Arthur Abbott, “did go away without stopping and making himself known.” At the same term of court the respondent was found guilty by a jury. After the charge by the presiding Justice to the jury, counsel for the respondent took exceptions tosthe interpretations given by the Justice in his charge to the word “cause”…
1Opinion of the CourtSpear, J.
This case comes up on the following exceptions, the verdict being guilty.
This was a criminal proceeding against the respondent, who was indicted at the January 1920 term of the Superior Court. The indictment is as follows: The grand jurors for said State upon their oath present that Elwood Verrill of Durham, in the County of Androscoggin, on the sixth day of December, A. D., 1919, at Portland in the County of Cumberland, while then and there operating a certain motor vehicle, to wit, an automobile, did go away without stopping and making himself known, after causing injury, as said Elwood…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Herchenbach v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1946
- Touchstone v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1963
- State v. DyerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1972
- State v. MulveyConnecticut Appellate Court · 1965
- Wilcox v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1965