Misplaced Pages

Commonwealth v. York

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

Commonwealth v. York
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
Full case name Commonwealth v. Peter York
DecidedMarch 1, 1845 (1845-03-01)
Citations50 Mass. 93
9 Metcalf 93
43 Am. Dec. 373
Case opinions
Decision byLemuel Shaw
DissentSamuel Wilde

Commonwealth v. York, 50 Mass. (9 Metcalf) 93 (1845), is a precedent-setting American criminal case that established the principle that although the prosecution must prove all elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant bears the burden of proving the defense of provocation, which pertains to the defendant's mental state. This ruling was consistent with Blackstone's Commentaries, which held that prosecution must prove the defendant committed a criminal act, and the defendant must then prove "circumstances of justification, excuse and alleviation". However, in federal courts, but not state all courts, this precedent was later modified by Davis v. United States (1895), which established the presumption of innocence regarding a defendant's mental state of being "legally capable of committing crime".

References

  1. ^ Criminal Law - Cases and Materials, 7th ed. 2012, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business; John Kaplan, Robert Weisberg, Guyora Binder, ISBN 978-1-4548-0698-1,
  2. 4 Blackstone's Commentaries 201 (1769)

External links

  • Text of Commonwealth v. York, 50 Mass. (9 Metcalf) 93 (1845) is available from: Justia


Stub icon

This article relating to case law in the United States or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

Categories:
Commonwealth v. York Add topic