State v. Murray
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
ExceptioNs from the Court of Common Pleas, Peruam J. presiding. The nature of the indictment will be found in the opinion of this Court.
Read the full summary
ExceptioNs from the Court of Common Pleas, Peruam J. presiding. The nature of the indictment will be found in the opinion of this Court. At the trial, the counsel for the respondents contended, that the facts set forth in the indictment, if found to be trae, did not constitute a conspiracy, but the crime of prison breach, and requested the Judge so to instruct the jury; but the Judge instructed the jury, that if they found the facts set forth in the indictment to be true, they would return a verdict of guilty. The County Attorney, for the purpose of showing that Alexander, one of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court, after a continuance for advisement, was prepared by
Emery J.
This comes before us on exceptions to the ruling and charge of the Court of Common Pleas. There are three counts in the indictment. Tho first charging that Wm. Murray, David Terry, Charles Burlingham, James Alexander, Thomas H. Marten, on the first of April, 1837, were persons lawfully confined in the county jail in Bangor, and then and there lawfully detained in the custody of the keeper of said prison, by divers legal pro*102cesses then in force against them, and that Silas P. Murray, on said fifth day of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Commonwealth v. KingsburyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
3Cited by9 opinions
- People v. Ah TeungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Graff v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Ex parte Ah BauNevada Supreme Court · 1875
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.