Commonwealth v. Gorham

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts · 1868 · Evidence

99 Mass. 420 (1868)

Updated August 22, 2026

Evidenceimpeachmentcredibility of witnessescriminal convictionjudgmentcomplete recordinfamycompetency of witnesses

Facts

The defendant testified in his own behalf, making the ordinary rules governing witness competency and credibility applicable to him. At common law, proving a witness incompetent for infamy required the complete criminal record, including conviction and final judgment. Under the Massachusetts statute, crime no longer made a witness incompetent, but a conviction could still be shown to affect credibility. The dispute was whether "conviction" for that purpose meant merely a finding of guilt or required judgment of the court.

Issue

When a witness's prior crime is offered only to affect credibility under the statute, does "conviction" mean a jury's finding of guilt alone, or does it require the broader and less technical sense of a complete record including the court's judgment?

Rule

Under Gen. Sts. c. 131, § 13, although no person is excluded from testifying by reason of crime, a prior crime may be shown to affect credibility only by the same complete record that would previously have been required to establish incompetency for infamy; "conviction" in this context includes the judgment of the court, not merely the verdict or finding of guilt.

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In a burglary trial in Boston, the prosecution calls Nina Alvarez as an eyewitness. On cross-examination, defense counsel offers a certified paper showing that, in an earlier case in Worcester, a jury found Nina guilty of larceny, but the paper does not include any judgment or sentence because post-trial motions were still pending at the time the copy was made.

Should the trial judge admit the paper to impeach Nina's credibility?

Explanation. The governing rule is that prior crime may be shown to affect credibility only by the same kind of complete record formerly required to prove incompetency for infamy, including final judgment. A verdict alone is not enough because the court may still set it aside before judgment, and the prosecution may still end without a final legal determination of guilt.