Legal Opinion

State v. Upson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 30, 1925No. 24,305PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.

Defendant appeals from the denial of his motion for a new trial after conviction of the offense of selling “a pint of moonshine” to one Ludwig Sellner on the evening of February 22, 1924. There is sufficient evidence to make the issue of guilt a fair jury question, so that the right to a new trial, if it exists, must stand upon the presence in the record of prejudicial error.

Defendant is a farmer living with his mother, now over 60 years of age, and his father who is well past 80. The evidence for the state tended to show that the source of supply from which the Sellner sale was made was the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Deal v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1895
  2. State v. MonroeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
  3. State v. AmesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
  4. Glassberg v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
  5. People v. GiddingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1910

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. State v. SweeneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
  2. State v. WoffordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
  3. State v. Alexander GrahamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  4. Boland v. MorrillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
  5. State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API