Commonwealth v. Langley

Decided October 15, 1859

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1859-10-15

<p>An indictment on St. 1855, a. 405, § 1, which charges the defendant with keeping and maintaining a tenement on a day named, “ and on divers other days and times between that day and the day of finding this indictment,” states the time with sufficient certainty, and is supported by evidence of such keeping at any time from the day named to the day of the finding of the indictment, as appearing by the certificate of the clerk indorsed thereon.</p> <p>An indictment on St. 1855, c. 405, § 1, which states with sufficient certainty the time of keeping the tenement, is not affected by omitting to insert the words “ then and there ” in the clause describing the unlawful purposes for which the building was used.</p>

Decided 1859-10-15

Metcalf, J.

¶1The indictment alleged the time of keeping and maintaining the nuisance with sufficient certainty, and in a form which warranted the admission of evidence of such keeping during all the time from the 1st of April 1858 to the day when the indictment was found, as shown by the certificate of the clerk indorsed thereon. Commonwealth v. Wood, 4 Gray, 11. The omission of the words “ then and there ” in the clause describing the uses of the tenement so kept, is .of no importance. Commonwealth v. Barker, 12 Cush. 186. Commonwealth v. Bugbee, 4 Gray, 206. Commonwealth v. Sullivan, 6 Gray, 477.

¶2 Exceptions overruled.