TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Commonwealth v. Jones

Commonwealth v. Jeremiah Jones

Commonwealth v. Jones, 121 Mass. 57 (1876)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 21, 1876
Judges
Ames
Citations
121 Mass. 571876 Mass. LEXIS 281
Headnotes
3n She triai of an indictment under the Gen. Sts. c. 160, § 28, charging the defendant with maliciously threatening to accuse a person named of a crime with the intent to extort money from him, evidence of the truth of the accusation is admissible upon the question of intent.
Summary
Indictment on the Gen. Sts. c. 160, § 28, charging that the defendant, at a time and place named, maliciously threatened to accuse one Joseph H. Robinson of the crime of an indecent assault upon the wife of the defendant, with the intent then and thereby to extort money from Robinson. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Putnam, J., it appeared in evidence on behalf of the government, that the defendant said to Robinson, substantially as follows: “You made an indecent assault upon my wife, and I will prosecute you unless you pay me seventy-five dollars.” On behalf of the defendant the evidence was that he said to Robinson substantially as follows : “ You made an indecent assault upon my wife, and I want satisfaction; ” that thereupon Robinson said to him “ What can I do for you ? ” to which the defendant replied, “ I will charge you seventy-five dollars.” The defendant offered his wife as a witness, for the purpose of showing by her the truth of the accusation made by him against Robinson, as tending to prove that the charge was not made by him maliciously. The judge excluded this evidence, and the jury returned a verdict of guilty. 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 — Ames

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

Ames, J.

The evidence offered as to the truth of the accusation against Robinson might have had an important bearing upon the question of the defendant’s intent, and should have been admitted. If Robinson had in fact made such an assault upon the defendant’s wife, the defendant might lawfully demand reparation. If the wrong which he offered to prove had in fact been committed, the demand which the defendant made for payment may have been without the intent to extort money, necea - saiy to constitute the crime alleged in the indictment.

Exceptions sustained.

How later courts describe this case

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

1880–1881: 11888–1889: 11894–1895: 21896–1897: 11914–1915: 11930–1931: 118802026peak 1894 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Maxwell Land Grant Co. v. Dawson151 U.S. 586 (1894)
  2. Commonwealth v. Coolidge128 Mass. 55 (1880)
  3. State v. Waite70 N.W. 596 (Iowa 1897)
  4. Commonwealth v. Buckley1 L.R.A. 624 (Mass. 1888)
  5. People v. Whittemore61 N.W. 13 (Mich. 1894)
  6. State v. Burns297 P. 212 (Wash. 1931) · Concurrence

Most recent

  1. State v. Burns297 P. 212 (Wash. 1931) · Concurrence
  2. People ex rel. Lesniak v. Mikulski31 N.Y. Crim. 125 (1914)
  3. State v. Waite70 N.W. 596 (Iowa 1897)
  4. People v. Whittemore61 N.W. 13 (Mich. 1894)
  5. Maxwell Land Grant Co. v. Dawson151 U.S. 586 (1894)
  6. Commonwealth v. Buckley1 L.R.A. 624 (Mass. 1888)

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