Legal Opinion · Concurrence
Wagner v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 9, 1925No. 4261Published
1ConcurrenceRudkin, Circuit Judge
The form of sentence in this ca.se is:
“It is therefore ordered and adjudged that the said A. E. Wagner and Art Matthiesen each be imprisoned for the period of three (3) months, and that each pay a fine in the sum of five hundred ($500) dollars, or, in default of the payment thereof, defendant so in default be further imprisoned for the period of five (5) months.”
I concur in the foregoing opinion solely because of the construction there placed on the sentence before us. To avoid any future misunderstanding, however, I desire to say that the construction thus given is not the natural one, if,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- In Re DeatonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Maine v. SturgisSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1912
- Brownbridge v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- State v. City of CamdenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1899
- Ex-parte MartiniSupreme Court of Florida · 1887
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.