Legal Opinion

Roark v. People

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 15, 1926No. 11,483PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burke

Plaietiee in error, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was convicted of owning, possessing and operating a still for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor, and sentenced to the penitentiary. To review that judgment he brings error, and the cause is now before us on his application for a supersedeas. His principal con tentions, and the only ones requiring consideration, are: (1) Chapter 80, Laws 1925, under which the information was filed, is unconstitutional; (2) the court erroneously instructed the jury on the subject of an accessory; (3) defendant could lawfully have been convicted on…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In re BreeneSupreme Court of Colorado · 1890
  2. Golden Canal Co. v. BrightSupreme Court of Colorado · 1884
  3. Cavanaugh v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1916
  4. Cyrus v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1924
  5. Moffitt v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1915

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Parrish v. LammSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
  2. Greeley Transportation Co. v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1926
  3. California Company v. StateSupreme Court of Colorado · 1959
  4. Titus v. TitusSupreme Court of Colorado · 1935
  5. Home Owners' Loan Corp. v. Public Water Works District No. 2Supreme Court of Colorado · 1939

7 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