¶1— There was error in the instruction, that it was of no importance whether Weeks owned the dam or not, also in the instruction, that the defendant might be convicted, although the dam was not owned by Morse. The ownership by Morse, being alleged, must be proved. The in*184struction dispensed with such proof, and authorized a conviction, even if the dam was not owned by Morse, but was owned by Weeks himself. Exceptions sustained.
30 Me. 182
State v. Weeks
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided July 1, 1849
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1849-07-01
Exceptions from the District Court, Rice, J. presiding. Indictment for maliciously- breaking down, injuring and destroying a reservoir dam, the property of Andrew Morse, Jr., erected for the purpose of maintaining a head of water for the use of his mills; to the injury of said Morse.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1868
1 district ·
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1849-07-01
View the full empirical analysis of this case →