Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1903-04-22
SUPERIOR COURT.
Verdict Against Perkins for Assault
Fine in King Liquor Case.

THOMAS LEIGH, County Attorney.
FRANK j. HAM. Sheriff
FRED w. LEE, Stenographer.
Augusta, April 81.
The jury in the case of Charles A.
Perkins, appellant from the decision of
the Hallowell municipal court, for as
sault and battery on Henry j. Emery
of Manchester, returned a verdict,
Tuesday afternoon, after half hours
elaboration, of guilty of technical as
sault. County Attorney Leigh appear
ed for the State and the defendant was
represented by f. M. Thompson, Esq,
of Augusta. The defence contended
that the complainant, Emery, was the
aggressor The county attorney moved
for sentence and Perkins was fined one
cent and costs.
The Perkins case wound I'D the
criminal docket, with the exception of
the cases against George G. Turner of
Augusta, for three single liquor sales
and the case against Jerry Dionne for
the robbery of a sum of money from
Michael Burns, proprietor of the River
side house of Augusta. These matters
will be considered after the completion
of the civil cases.
The appeal cases against Joseph
King, alias Joseph Roi, for liquor SELL
ing came up for disposition, Tuesday
When the cases were considered a
week ago County Attorney Leigh
argued for a jail sentence. Bene-
dict F. Maher, Esq, counsel
for King, raised the point that
as a matter of law the term having
passed at which the sentence of the
lower court was affirmed, which was a
fine that at a later term that sentence
could not be changed. Roi was fined
500 and costs in each case.
Mr. Makers contention was sus-
tanned.
County Attorney Leigh said:
IF your honor please, the court will
remember that when the criminal
docket was called, Tuesday, of last
week, that l moved for sentence in
Numbers 149 and $50, State VS.. Joseph
King, alias Roi. and stated the facts in
regard TO this man and his connection
with the liquor business in Augusta,
and asked the court to impose a Jail
sentence on JOS. Roi. These two cases
We're search and seizure cases that
came into the superior court on APP
peal from the municipal court of Au-
gusta, entered upon the superior court
docket in January. There was no APP
pearance for the defendant, Mr.. Roi,
and judgment below was affirmed and
principal and sureties defaulted, scirc
facias brought and those two cases
are now on the civil docket.
when / made my motion for a Jail
sentence | did it without investigation
as to whether Jail sentence could be
legally imposed, in view of the record
on the criminal docket that judgment
below was affirmed and principal and
sureties defaulted.
Having investigated the matter, l
am in doubt whether. after this court
has affirmed the judgment of the in
ferior municipal court which carried
with it Il fine and costs, whether the
court could change that sentence to a
straight jail sentence, and so in my
position as county attorney l ask your
honor to affirm the sentence of the low
err court in the one case which has not
been disposed Of
Judge Hall in rendering his decision
said This is a case in which the
municipal court of Augusta, having
| concurrent jurisdiction in this class on
cases. with this court, pronounced
Judgment, HilpoSIHS ii me VI TIVo anu
costs. From this sentence the respond
ent appealed. and his appeal was en-
tered at the last January term of this
court. The respondent did not appear
and on motion of the county he and
his sureties were defaulted and judg-
ment of the court below affirmed. The
county attorney now moves that a SEN
tence to Jail be imposed. l am pre-
cluded from revising the penalty by the
fact that Judgment was pronounced at
the January term. Judgment in a
criminal case includes the sentence and
can be altered only at the same term
when it is pronounced. That judgment
is to be enforced-fine. 500 and costs.
and in default of payment, 60 days in
jail