Commonwealth v. Oakes
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Complaint to the Second District Court of Eastern Middlesex against Henry H. Oakes, Thomas Keane, and Fred C. Newton, for unlawfully exposing and keeping for sale intoxicating liquors.
Read the full summary
Complaint to the Second District Court of Eastern Middlesex against Henry H. Oakes, Thomas Keane, and Fred C. Newton, for unlawfully exposing and keeping for sale intoxicating liquors. The copy of the record of the conviction of the defendants in the district court transmitted on appeal to the Superior Court contained the only copy of the complaint sent to the Superior Court, and recited, “Which complaint is read to the said defendants in open court, and they are asked by the court whether they are guilty or not guilty of the offence therein charged, and said Oakes, Keane, and Newton plead…
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
The defendants were severally found guilty in the Superior Court. If the record of the proceedings in the district court failed to disclose that the defendants severally pleaded, or were severally found guilty, then the jurisdiction of the appellate court would not be affected. The district court had jurisdiction, and any irregularity in its proceedings was rendered immaterial by the appeal which vacated the judgment of that court. Commonwealth v. O'Neil, 6 Gray, 343, 345. Commonwealth v. Tinkham, 14 Gray, 12. Commonwealth v. Holmes, 119 Mass. 195, 199.
If we are to assume that the only copy…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HolmesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Commonwealth v. Certain Intoxicating LiquorsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
3Cited by3 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MonahanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Commonwealth v. PopeMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1976
- United States v. Chin Dong YingDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1916