Commonwealth v. Graves
Cases that cite this one
6 later published cases cite this decision.
- Ott v. Board of Registration in Medicine (Mass. 1931)
- Commonwealth v. DeLacey (Mass. 1930)
- State v. Sturgis (S.D. 1929)
- Whittington v. State (Ark. 1923)
- Backenstoe v. State (Ohio Circuit Courts 1900)
- Paul v. Paul (New Jersey Court of Chancery 1883)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The instructions were in all respects apt and proper, and in conformity to previous decisions of this court. Commonwealth v. Willard, 22 Pick. 476. Commonwealth v. Downing, 4 Gray, 29.
No question seems to have been raised at the tidal as to the elements necessary to constitute a legal sale. The presumption is that these were sufficiently stated to the jury. The real point which seems to have been made by the counsel for the defend*, ant was, that three sales were not proved, if it appeared that the liquor was purchased by the witnesses under a preconcerted plan in pursuance of which it was called for and delivered at short intervals, although the ordinary elements constituting three distinct sales were also proved. But such an instruction could not have been properly given. The ruling of the court on this point
Exceptions overruled.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.