Legal Opinion

Coyle v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided September 3, 1929No. 17PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

This appeal challenges the sufficiency of the information, upon, the *400sole ground that it did not sufficiently identify the offense charged. The information in part alleged that the defendant, on January 22,1927, in Oklahoma county, in the Western district of the state of Oklahoma, did unlawfully sell and deliver to Orival Snook intoxicating liquor, to wit, whisky. In the lower court, the attack on the information was by motion in arrest of judgment. The information alleged the name of the purchaser. This sufficiently identified and ear-marked the offense. Swafford v. United States (C. C. A.)…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Jarl v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1927
  2. Swafford v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
  3. Davis v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hood v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930
  2. Smith v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930
  3. Flowers v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930
  4. Turk v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API