State v. Dennison
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for Douglas county. Tried below before Baker, J. Defendant insisted that the information was bad, because it failed to allege in what capacity the defendant acted in opening the lottéry, whether in the capacity of owner, or otherwise.
Read the full summary
Error to the district court for Douglas county. Tried below before Baker, J. Defendant insisted that the information was bad, because it failed to allege in what capacity the defendant acted in opening the lottéry, whether in the capacity of owner, or otherwise. The court held that it was necessary to a good information that the information set out whether defendant acted in the capacity of owner, or whether he acted in the capacity of “otherwise,” but neither the court nor the attorney for the defendant indicated what, in their judgment, is the meaning of the term “otherwise” as used in this…
1Opinion of the Court
Nokvad, 0. J.
We are asked by the state to pass judgment upon cer*160tain proceedings had in the district court of Douglas •county upon an information filed therein against one Thomas Dennison, the essential portions of which are as follows:
“That on the 16th day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight - hundred and ninety-nine, and on divers days between the said 16th day of January, 1899, and the 26th ;day of January, 1899, Thomas Dennison, late of the county of Douglas aforesaid, in the county of Douglas and State of Nebraska aforesaid, then and there being in said county, did…
2Cited by7 opinions
- People v. McKeanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- State v. GaaschWashington Supreme Court · 1909
- Pueblo v. BenítezSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1913
- State v. HardwickWashington Supreme Court · 1911
- Holladay v. RichNebraska Supreme Court · 1913
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.