midpage

Commonwealth v. BuckleyCommonwealth v. Buckley

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Oct 20, 1887
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Holmes
Holmes, J.

The name of the person threatened is necessary to the identity of the offence ‍​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‍charged in the indictment, and *182therefore must be proved as set forth. Commonwealth v. Mehan, 11 Gray, 821. It is settled in this Commonwealth that a middle name or initial is part of ‍​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‍the name, and a variance in regard to it is fatal. Commonwealth v. Perkins, 1 Pick. 388. Commonwealth v. Hall, 3 Pick. 262. Commonwealth v. Shearman, 11 Cush. 546. Commonwealth v. McAvoy, 16 Gray, 235. Terry v. Sisson, 125 Mass. 560, 561. The ruling that there was no ‍​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‍variance if Frank A. White was the person called Frank E. White in the indictment, probably went upon the ground that the E. might be rejected as surplusage, ‍​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‍as is held in some States. It cannot be said, as matter of law, that.A. and E. are the same. There was no evidence that the party was ‍​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‍ever called Frank E. White, as in Commonwealth v. O‘Hearn, 132 Mass. 553. See also Commonwealth v. Gormley, 133 Mass. 580.

Exceptions sustained.

Case Details

Case Name: Commonwealth v. Buckley
Court Name: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Date Published: Oct 20, 1887
Citations: 13 N.E. 368; 145 Mass. 181; 1887 Mass. LEXIS 42
Court Abbreviation: Mass.
Log In