Com. v. Burrough
| Decision Date | 01 January 1895 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. BURROUGH. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
M.J. Sughrue, First Asst. Dist. Atty., for the Commonwealth.
J.E Bates, for defendant.
1. As the defendant was defended by counsel, he had no right without being sworn as a witness, to make a narrative statement to the jury, or to tell them his side of the story. Com. v. McConnell (Mass.) 39 N.E. 107. The refusal of the court to permit him to make any statement to the jury except by way of argument, unless he was first sworn as a witness in his own behalf, was correct, as was the final exclusion of his proposed statement when he declined either to be sworn or to argue the case.
2. The fact that the defendant had been called upon by the presiding justice of the municipal court, while a complaint was pending against him in that court upon the charges contained in the present indictment, and during proceedings in that court against other defendants, who were charged in another complaint with the offense described in the second count of the indictment, to tell the justice of the municipal court about the defendant's connection with the cases and that thereupon the defendant testified in the case against the other persons so charged, did not entitle him to be discharged from the prosecution. The commonwealth was not represented in the proceedings before the municipal court by its prosecuting officers, and it is unnecessary to consider the effect of the use by such an officer of the testimony of one also charged with the offense.
3. Before the hearing in the municipal court the defendant had made certain confessions to the police officer by whom he was arrested, and the officer testified that before they were made he said to the defendant that he had better tell all he knew about the supposed offenses. But there was also evidence from another police officer, who was present during the whole interview, tending to show that no such statement was made to the defendant, and that no threat or inducement was held out to him before he made the alleged confessions. There was no evidence that any inducement or threat was used by the justice of the municipal court to induce the defendant to give his testimony, which was given on the day following the alleged confession to the arresting officer. The case is thus the ordinary one of conflicting evidence upon the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ferguson v. State of Georgia, 44
...v. Stewart, 255 Mass. 9, 151 N.E. 74, 44 A.L.R. 579; see also Commonwealth v. McConnell, 162 Mass. 499, 39 N.E. 107; Commonwealth v. Burrough, 162 Mass. 513, 39 N.E. 184; Commonwealth v. Dascalakis, 246 Mass. 12, 32, 140 N.E. 470, 479. For other considerations of the common-law statement, s......
-
Commonwealth v. Polian
...Commonwealth v. Brewer, 164 Mass. 577, 581, 42 N. E. 92. More often the quantum of proof has not been stated. Commonwealth v. Burrough, 162 Mass. 513, 514, 39 N. E. 184;Commonwealth v. Cantor, 253 Mass. 509, 512, 149 N. E. 205;Commonwealth v. Madeiros, 255 Mass. 304, 308, 151 N. E. 297, 47 ......
-
People v. Richardson
...from New York's, the courts, with hardly an exception (cf. Commonwealth v. McConnell, 162 Mass. 499, 502, 39 N.E. 107; Commonwealth v. Burrough, 162 Mass. 513, 39 N.E. 184), have held that an attorney-represented defendant has no right to participate personally in the proceedings. And that ......
-
Commonwealth v. Polian
... ... Commonwealth v. Brewer, 164 Mass ... 577 , 581. More often the quantum of proof has not been ... stated. Commonwealth v. Burrough, 162 Mass. 513 , ... 514. Commonwealth v. Cantor, 253 Mass. 509 , 512 ... Commonwealth v. Madeiros, 255 Mass. 304 , 308. In ... other ... ...