Commonwealth v. Friedman

• Decision Date: 29 May 1926
• Citation: 256 Mass. 214
• Parties: COMMONWEALTH v. CHARLES FRIEDMAN.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

256 Mass. 214

COMMONWEALTH v. CHARLES FRIEDMAN.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

May 29, 1926

March 3, 5, 1926.

Present: CROSBY PIERCE, CARROLL, & WAIT, JJ.

Receiving Stolen Goods. Practice, Criminal, Continuance, Production of stolen article by Commonwealth.

An indictment charged a defendant with receiving and aiding in the concealment of a stolen automobile, "the property of" a certain corporation. At the trial there was evidence that an automobile owned by the corporation named in the indictment and bearing a motor number

8028402 was stolen in August; that in October a car of the same make as that corporation's, registered in the name of the defendant with a motor number 5186934 was found by the State police the number was processed with acids and under it was found the number 8028402; that the defendant gave the name and address of one from whom he stated he had bought the car that the address he gave was a vacant lot and the alleged vendor could not be found by the Commonwealth and was not called to testify by the defendant. Held, that there was sufficient evidence to make the case a proper one for the consideration of the jury and the judge could not properly direct a verdict in the defendant's favor.

The disposition of a motion, that an indictment when called for trial shall be continued because "counsel had just that day come into the said case," and also because of a certain publication in several newspapers which was prejudicial to the defendant, rested in the judicial discretion of the trial judge, and its denial was held not shown to be an abuse of discretion.

At the trial above described, it appeared that the Commonwealth knew where the automobile in question was. It did not appear that the Commonwealth had possession of it. Held, that in the circumstances it was not error for the trial judge to refuse to require the Commonwealth to produce the automobile upon request by the defendant.

INDICTMENT, found and returned on April 14, 1924. The indictment contained twelve counts. The twelfth count was the only count submitted to the jury. Proceedings at the trial in the Superior Court, which was before Broadhurst, J., are described in the opinion. The defendant alleged exceptions.

F.R. Mackenzie, for the defendant. M. Caro, Special Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.

CARROLL, J. The defendant was found guilty on a count in an indictment charging him with receiving and aiding in the concealment of a stolen automobile, "the property of Winslow & Co Inc." The evidence was conflicting, but the jury could have found that an automobile, the property of "Winslow & Co., Inc.," was stolen from it in August, 1923 that this machine was numbered 8028402; that in October, 1923, a car registered in the name of Charles Friedman with the "registration No. 366499, motor No. 5186934," was found in Springer's Garage and taken to the State House and was processed with acids; "that another number appeared underneath this number, which said number was 8028402"; that the defendant said he bought the car from one Joe Bloom of 1439 Blue Hill Avenue, Dorchester; that 1439 Blue Hill Avenue was a vacant lot; that the Commonwealth was unable to locate any one by the name of Joe Bloom, and he was not called by the defendant. There was...