Legal Opinion

State v. Conklin

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1906PublishedCited by 7 opinions

From Josephine: Hiero K. Hanna, Judge. Arthur Conklin was convicted of a criminal libel and sentenced to pay a fine of $250 and costs.

1Opinion of the Court

Mr. .Justice Moore

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant, Arthur Conklin, was informed against, tried, and convicted of the crime of willfully publishing-false and scandalous printed matter of and concerning another, with intent to injure and defame such person, and, having been sentenced to pay a fine, he appeals. The facts constituting the alleged crime are charged as follows;

“That the said Arthur Conklin on, to wit, the 4th day of June, 1904, in the County of Josephine, State of Oregon, then and there being, did then and there willfully publish in a newspaper called Oregon Mining…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Cotulla v. KerrTexas Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Gabe v. McGinnisIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
  3. Haines v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1891
  4. Davis v. SladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Castle v. HoustonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Peck v. Coos Bay Times Publishing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Kilgore v. KoenOregon Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Barnett v. PhelpsOregon Supreme Court · 1920
  4. State v. ReyesOregon Supreme Court · 1957
  5. State v. ReyesOregon Supreme Court · 1957

2 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