TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Mayo

United States v. Mayo, 26 F. Cas. 1230 (1853)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Historical Federal Courts
Decided
October 15, 1853
Judges
Curtis
Citations
26 F. Cas. 12301 Curt. 433
Headnotes
Case No. 15,754. Criminal Practice—Plea by Attorney. Cinder what circumstances a person indicted .'or a misdemeanor, may plead by attorney. [Cited in People y. Genet, 59 N. Y. 82; People v. Redinger, 55 Cal. 294; State v. Conners, 20 W. Ya. 5; State t. Garland, 67 Me. 426.]
Summary
Mr. Dodge moved to be allowed to plead to the indictment, which was for beating a seaman, in the absence of the defendant [Amariah Mayo]. He produced a special power of attorney from the defendant to himself, authorizing him to plead and defend at the trial, in the absence of the defendant; and also an affidavit, showing that the defendant was master of a vessel, bound on a voyage and ready for sea, when he was arrested; and that if he were to remain till the trial, he would lose his voyage, and be subjected to much other inconvenience. The district attorney consented to the motion, stating that it was a case of no aggravated character.

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

Opinion of the Court — Curtis

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

CURTIS, Circuit Justice.

I have considered this motion with some care, as affecting the practice of the court; and I have also conferred with the district judge, who has had occasion, heretofore, to pass on similar questions. I will state the results at which we have arrived.

1. To save his recognizance, even in case of a misdemeanor, the defendant must appear personally.

2. He is liable to be called on his recognizance at any time, either on the motion of the district attorney, or by the order of the court, on its own motion, if it sees cause to direct it.

3. It is in the discretion of the court, to allow one indicted for a misdemeanor to plead and defend, in his absence, by attorney. This discretion will be regulated by the following circumstances.

1. That it is not an offence for which imprisonment must be inflicted.

2. The court must be satisfied, that the nature of the case, and its circumstances, are such that imprisonment will not be inflicted.

3. The district attorney must consent, or it must appear to the court that he unreasonably and improperly withholds his consent.

4. Sufficient cause must be shown, on affidavit, to account for the absence of the defendant.

5. A special power of attorney, to appear and plead and defend in his absence, must be executed by the defendant, and filed in court by the attorney.

I have considered this case; and being of opinion that its facts bring it within these requirements, the attorney may be admitted to plead and defend.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 10 cases

View all citing references →
1877–1878: 11879–1880: 11907–1908: 11987–1988: 11989–1990: 21993–1994: 21995–1996: 12011–2012: 118772026peak 1989 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Anderson v. Ritterbusch1908 OK 250, 98 P. 1002
  2. United States v. German Munoz-Flores863 F.2d 654 (9th Cir. 1988)
  3. People v. Redinger55 Cal. 290 (1880)
  4. Wyodak Resources Development Corp. v. United States637 F.3d 1127 (10th Cir. 2011)
  5. 3M Co. (Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing) v. Browner17 F.3d 1453 (D.C. Cir. 1994)
  6. 3m Company v. Carol M. Browner17 F.3d 1453 (D.C. Cir. 1994)

Most recent

  1. Wyodak Resources Development Corp. v. United States637 F.3d 1127 (10th Cir. 2011)
  2. Opinion No. (1996)(Okla. Att’y Gen. Feb. 21, 1996)
  3. 3m Company v. Carol M. Browner17 F.3d 1453 (D.C. Cir. 1994)
  4. 3M Co. (Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing) v. Browner17 F.3d 1453 (D.C. Cir. 1994)
  5. United States v. Vines718 F. Supp. 895 (S.D. Ala. 1989)
  6. United States v. Greene709 F. Supp. 636 (E.D. Pa. 1989)

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