State v. Cox
| Decision Date | 11 March 1898 |
| Citation | 69 N.H. 246,41 A. 862 |
| Parties | STATE v. COX. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Exceptions from Merrimack county.
Edward Cox was convicted of illegally keeping malt liquor, and he excepts. Exceptions overruled.
Indictment for a second offense of illegally keeping malt liquor for sale. Verdict for the state. The alleged former conviction was before a police court, and the only record of it was the original complaint, with minutes indorsed upon it by the clerk of court, showing that the defendant pleaded guilty and was fined. The complaint and minutes were received in evidence, subject to the defendant's exception.
George M. Fletcher, for the State.
Daniel B. Donovan, Almon F. Burbank, and Albin, Martin & Howe, for defendant.
The original complaint and the minutes indorsed upon it contained explicit evidence of all facts required for extending the judgment. They were the only evidence of the judgment at the time of trial. The court had authority to allow a formal record to be made from them before receiving the evidence. Willard v. Harvey, 24 N. H. 344; Ballou v. Smith, 29 N. H. 530. The extended record would prove the same facts with the same force that the complaint and minutes proved. The defendant would receive no benefit by the change in the form of proof. It is held in Massachusetts, under similar circumstances, that the complaint and clerk's minutes are competent evidence of the judgment. Pruden v. Alden, 23 Pick. 184, 187; Com. v. Hatfield, 107 Mass. 227, 231; Good v?French, 115 Mass. 201, 204. Similar evidence was received, apparently without objection, in Caouette v. Young, 67 N. H. 159, 32 Atl. 157. Exceptions overruled.
BLODGETT, J., did not sit The others concurred.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Deane
...of the court record prepared by the clerk or the judge of the Nashua municipal court. Such proof, of course, would be proper. State v. Cox, 69 N.H. 246, 41 A. 862; RSA 516:30. However, the question at issue is not which method of proof was the best evidence but whether the method employed i......
-
State v. Scheminisky
...53 N.Y.S. 497, 498; State v. Manicke, 139 Mo. 545, 41 S.W. 223; State v. Moore, 121 Mo. 514, 42 Am. St. 542, 26 S.W. 345, 346; State v. Cox, 69 N.H. 246, 41 A. 862; Johnson v. People, 65 Barb. (N. Y.) 342; v. People, 55 N.Y. 512; 15 Cent. Dig., tit. "Criminal Law," sec. 1202 et seq.; Clark ......
-
Strong v. N.H. Box Co.
...in the progress of the case there is adequate data for the extension of the records. Willard v. Harvey, supra, 348, 349; State v. Cox, 69 N. H. 246, 247, 41 A. 862; Jaffrey v. Smith, 76 N. H. 168, 171,172, 80 A. 504. "Until the contrary is shown, 'omnia præsumun-tur rite acta' must be the m......
-
Town of Jaffrey v. Smith
...of what was done; but when (as in this case) the proof is forthcoming, the fact of the adjudication is legally established. State v. Cox, 69 N. H. 246, 41 Atl. 862. The amendment or extension of the record ordered and made in Willard v. Harvey added nothing of substance to the proof of the ......