Commonwealth v. Byrnes

Commonwealth v. Martin Byrnes

Commonwealth v. Byrnes, 126 Mass. 248 (1879)

Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided: January 30, 1879
Judges: Gray
Citations: 126 Mass. 2481879 Mass. LEXIS 223

Cited by 7

Headnotes

Under the Gen. Sts. c. 173, § 8, and the St. of 1864, c. 250, § 2, questions of law, arising upon a motion to quash, seasonably filed, and overruled by the Superior Court, may, after the conviction of the defendant, if in the opinion of the presiding judge they are so important or so doubtful as to require the decision of this court, be reported, at the desire or with the consent of the defendant, for its determination. Under the St. of 1875, c. 99, § 1, which enacts that “ no person shall sell, or expose or keep for sale, spirituous or intoxicating liquors, except as authorized in this act,” a complaint, which merely alleges that the defendant “unlawfully did expose and keep for sale intoxicating liquors, with intent unlawfully to sell the same within this Commonwealth,” is insufficient.

Summary

Complaint on the St. of 1875, <?. 99, § 1, to the First District Court of Southern Middlesex, alleging that the defendant, on April 27,1878, at Framingham in the county of Middlesex, “ unlawfully did expose and keep for sale intoxicating liquors, with intent unlawfully to sell the same within this Commonwealth, against the peace of said Commonwealth and contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided.” Before judgment in the District Court, the defendant moved to quash the complaint, “because there is no sufficient allegation that the defendant was not authorized by law to do the acts therein mentioned,” and for other reasons not now necessary to be stated. This motion was overruled, and the defendant was convicted, and appealed to the Superior Court, and there renewed his motion to quash. Bacon, J., overruled the motion; and thereupon the defendant pleaded guilty, and the questions of law, arising at the trial upon the motion so overruled, being in the opinion of the presiding judge so important and doubtful as to require the decision of this court, were reported, at the desire and request of the defendant, for its consideration and determination.

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

Opinion of the Court — Gray

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

Gray, C. J.

Upon objections to a complaint, specifically assigned by demurrer or motion to quash, filed before judgment in the District Court, and renewed in the Superior Court upon appeal, the decision of the Superior Court is subject to revision by this com’t on bill of exceptions. St. 1864, o. 250, § 2. Commonwealth v. McGrovern, 10 Allen, 193 . Commonwealth v. Walton, 11 Allen, 238 . The Gen. Sts. c. 173, § 8, authorize any question of law arising “ upon the trial of a person convicted in the Superior Court,” which in the opinion of the presiding judge is so important or so doubtful as to require the decision of this court, to be reserved, at the desire or with the consent of the defendant, upon report; and apply as well to questions arising upon the trial of an issue of law, as to questions of law arising upon the trial of an issue of fact. Commormealth v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 121 Mass. 36 . The objections to the sufficiency of the allegations in this complaint are therefore properly before us.

By the St. of 1875, o. 99, § 1, upon which this complaint is founded, it is enacted that “no person shall sell, or expose or keep for sale, spirituous or intoxicating liquors, except as author ized in this act.” It is unnecessary to negative in the complaint the specific exceptions afterwards enumerated in the proviso to this section and in the subsequent sections of the statute. But the exception in the enacting clause of the first section, already quoted, should be negatived, by the words “ not having then and there any license, appointment or authority according to law,” or by other equivalent words; and the want of any such negative allegation renders this complaint fatally defective. The insertion of the word “unlawfully” does not dispense with the necessity of specifically alleging the elements required by the enacting clause of the statute and by the rules of criminal pleading to constitute the crime charged against the defendant. Commonwealth v. Hart, 11 Cush. 130 , 136. Commonwealth v. Wilson, 11 Cush. 412 . Commonwealth v. Tuttle, 12 Cush. 502 . Commonwealth v. Jennings, 121 Mass. 47 . Commonwealth v. Davis, 121 Mass. 352 .

Complaint quashed.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 7 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Murray v. Continental Insurance48 N.E.2d 145 (Mass. 1943)
Commonwealth v. Feci235 Mass. 562 (1920)
State v. Lightfoot78 N.W. 41 (Iowa 1899)
Smythe v. State1909 OK CR 58, 101 P. 611
Terry v. Brightman129 Mass. 535 (1880)
State v. Skolfield29 A. 922 (Me. 1893)

Most recent

Murray v. Continental Insurance48 N.E.2d 145 (Mass. 1943)
Commonwealth v. Feci235 Mass. 562 (1920)
Smythe v. State1909 OK CR 58, 101 P. 611
State v. Lightfoot78 N.W. 41 (Iowa 1899)
Commonwealth v. Crossley39 N.E. 278 (Mass. 1895)
State v. Skolfield29 A. 922 (Me. 1893)

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 3

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Commonwealth v. Jennings, 121 Mass. 47 (1876)	29
	Commonwealth v. Boston & Albany R.R., 121 Mass. 36 (1876)	15
	Commonwealth v. Davis, 121 Mass. 352 (1876)	7

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list