101 Mass. 31
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided January 15, 1869
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1869-01-15
<p>The attorney for the defendant, having examined a letter which the district attorney offered to read at a criminal trial, said that he had no objection to its being read, bat, after the district attorney had begun to read it, objected to its admission in evidence. The presiding judge, however, refused to stop the reading, ffeld, that such refusal, at that time, was matter of discretion, to the exercise of which no exceptions lay.</p>
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1881
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1869-01-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1for the Commonwealth, did not argue the competency of the letter; but contended that, after the letter had been examined by the defendant’s counsel, put in evidence and partly read with his consent, the refusal of the presiding judge to entertain an objection to its admission was within his discretion, to the exercise of which no exception lay. And of that opinion was the Court.
¶2 Exceptions overruled.