State v. Stimpson

Decided July 1, 1858

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1858-07-01

<p>In an indictment may be joined a count charging one with larceny, and a count against him as receiver of stolen goods.</p> <p>One, who knowingly receives or aids in concealing goods stolen in another State and brought into this State, is made liable therefor by c. 156, § 10 of Revised Statutes.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently July 2009

1 state decisions

Relies on Commonwealth v. Andrews

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1858-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Hathaway, J.,

¶1announced the opinion of the Court, that there was no error in the ruling and instructions of the Judge at Nisi Prius, and ordered an entry of

¶2 Exceptions overruled.

Rice, J.,

¶3remarked, that the instructions, as applicable to the third count, are correct; as applicable to the fourth count, they would be erroneous, it not being alleged in that count, *611that the principal larceny was committed in this State. See Commonwealth v. Andrews, 2 Mass. 14.

¶4As to this doctrine of constructive larceny, I do not feel at all satisfied; and, if it were a new question, I should be opposed to it. On principle, it is, in my judgment, erroneous ; and, being so, should not be extended.