TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Commonwealth v. Stone

Commonwealth v. Charles Stone

Commonwealth v. Stone, 105 Mass. 469 (1870)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 15, 1870
Judges
Chapman
Citations
105 Mass. 469
Cited by 5
Headnotes
The signature of the district attorney is not essential to the validity of an indictment.
Summary
Indictment for being a common seller of intoxicating liquors. In the superior court, before the jury were empanelled, Wilkinson, J,, overruled a motion of the defendant to quash the indictment for the reason that it was not signed, indorsed or countersigned by the district attorney. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the defendant alleged exceptions.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Chapman

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Chapman, C. J.

The usual and proper practice is, that the prosecuting officer shall countersign indictments; but there is nothing in the statutes requiring it, and we do not think it is indispensable to the validity of an indictment. It has been so held in New Hampshire. State v. Farrar, 41 N. H. 53. The bill is to be found by the grand jury, and therefore the signature of ihe foreman is necessary. Webster's case, 5 Greenl. 432. State v. Squire, 10 N. H. 558. State v. Freeman, 13 N. H. 488. But the prosecuting attorney acts independently of the grand jury and not as a part of that body. Exceptions overruled.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →
1890: 11896: 11910: 21950: 118902026peak 1910 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Lane135 U.S. 443 (1890)
  2. People v. Strauch93 N.E. 126 (Ill. 1910)
  3. People v. Strauch153 Ill. App. 544 (1910)
  4. Cross v. People66 Ill. App. 170 (1896)
  5. State ex rel. Swietkoski v. Swenson72 A.2d 685 (Md. 1950)

Most recent

  1. State ex rel. Swietkoski v. Swenson72 A.2d 685 (Md. 1950)
  2. People v. Strauch93 N.E. 126 (Ill. 1910)
  3. People v. Strauch153 Ill. App. 544 (1910)
  4. Cross v. People66 Ill. App. 170 (1896)
  5. In re Lane135 U.S. 443 (1890)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list