State v. Bartlett
| Citation | 105 Me. 212,74 A. 18 |
| Parties | STATE v. BARTLETT. |
| Decision Date | 27 February 1909 |
| Court | Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US) |
Exceptions from Supreme Judicial Court, Somerset County.
Nelson W. Bartlett was convicted in the Skowhegan municipal court of unlawfully keeping intoxicating liquor, and appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court for Somerset county, where he entered a plea of guilty, and then filed a motion in arrest of judgment, which having been overruled, he excepts. Exceptions overruled.
Search and seizure process originating in the municipal court of Skowhegan, Somerset county. On his arraignment the defendant pleaded not guilty, but on trial was found guilty and sentenced to pay a fine of $100 and costs. He then appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court in said county. In the appellate court, Amos K. Butler, claiming to be Special Attorney for the state for said county, moved to proceed to trial. The defendant then filed a motion "praying that he be not ordered to trial by the court, on the ? ground that the said Amos K. Butler had no lawful right or authority to prosecute said case, to which motion the Special Attorney for the state filed an answer." The presiding justice overruled the motion. The defendant then withdrew his plea of not guilty, pleaded guilty, and then filed a motion in arrest of judgment based on the same ground as the former motion. This motion was also overruled. The defendant then excepted to each of the aforesaid rulings.
The case is stated in the opinion.
Argued before EMERY, C. J., and WHITEHOUSE, SPEAR, CORNISH, and BIRD, JJ.
Amos K. Butler, Special Atty., for the State. Forrest Goodwin, for defendant.
The respondent was convicted in the Skowhegan municipal court of the offense of unlawfully keeping intoxicating liquors, and appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court for Somerset county. In the appellate court Amos K. Butler, not the county attorney, but claiming to be special attorney for the state for Somerset county, undertook to appear and prosecute the case for the state. The respondent objected, but the court ruled that Mr. Butler might act as counsel for the state. Thereupon the respondent withdrew his plea of not guilty, pleaded guilty, and then filed a motion in arrest of judgment upon the same ground, viz., that Mr. Butler was allowed to prosecute for the state. This motion was also overruled. To each of the rulings the respondent excepted.
Passing the question whether after a general plea of guilty a respondent, without withdrawing his plea can be heard to complain of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Atkins
...196, 228 So.2d 24 (1969); Thomas v. State, 59 So.2d 517 (Fla.1952); Territory v. Chong Chak Lai, 19 Haw. 437 (1909); State v. Bartlett, 105 Me. 212, 74 A. 18 (1909); Commonwealth v. Knapp, 27 Mass. (10 Pick.) 477, 20 Am.Dec. 534 (1830); Goldsby v. State, 240 Miss. 647, 123 So.2d 429, 124 So......
-
Robinson v. State
... ... State v. Wilson, 24 Kan. 189, 36 Am. Rep. 257; ... State v. Fitzgerald, 49 Iowa, 260, 31 Am. Rep. 148; ... State v. Helm, 92 Iowa, 540, 61 N.W. 246; People ... v. Powell, 87 Cal. 348, 25 P. 481, 11 L. R. A. 75; ... State v. Wells, 54 Kan. 161, 37 P. 1005; State ... v. Bartlett, 55 Me. 200; State v. Bartlett, 105 ... Me. 212, 74 A. 18, 24 L. R. A. (N. S.) 564, 134 Am. St. Rep ... 542; Hayner v. People, 213 Ill. 142, 72 N.E. 792; ... Shular v. State, 105 Ind. 289, 4 N.E. 870, 55 Am ... Rep. 211; Jackson v. Commonwealth, 96 Va. 107, 30 ... S.E. 452; ... ...
-
Cantrell v. Com., 840269
...203 N.C. 13, 26, 164 S.E. 737, 744 (1932); he may participate only with the express consent of the public prosecutor, State v. Bartlett, 105 Me. 212, 74 A. 18 (1909); he may make a closing jury argument only in the court's discretion, Sawyers v. Commonwealth, 88 Va. at 357, 13 S.E. 708; and......
-
People v. Gerold
...431, 96 N. E. 268;People v. Donaldson, 255 Ill. 19, 99 N. E. 62, Ann. Cas. 1913D, 90. See, also, State v. Bartley, 105 Me. 212, 74 Atl. 18,24 L. R. A. (N. S.) 564, 134 Am. St. Rep. 542, and cases cited in note. So far as we are advised, this court has never been called upon in any criminal ......