People v. Whittemore
Michigan Supreme Court
Exceptions before judgment from Alpena. (Kelley, J.) Eespondent was convicted of maliciously threatening to accuse, a certain person of the crime of perjury. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
Eespondent was convicted of maliciously threatening to accuse one Paul Lucas of the crime of perjury, in violation of How. Stat. § 9093.
The facts are that the respondent is an attorney, .residing at St. Paul, Minn., and was the attorney of one Joseph Stehr, who had a suit pending in the Minnesota courts against Paul Lucas and others, involving the title to certain lands in St. Paul. Eespondent came to Alpena in December, 1893, for the purpose of taking the depositions of witnesses in the case referred to, and, as subsequent events would indicate, with the further purpose of procuring a deed…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Turner v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
- Cargen v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- People v. TenElshofMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Commonwealth v. JonesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- State v. GoodwinSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1885
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. HarrisMichigan Supreme Court · 2014
- People v. KristMichigan Court of Appeals · 1980
- People v. WickesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1906
- People v. FobbMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
- Territory v. ParkHawaii Supreme Court · 1953
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.