State v. Crombie
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Defendant was convicted in the municipal court of Minneapolis of the offense of practicing dentistry without a license. The case was tried before Waite, J., who found defendant guilty and ordered that defendant pay a fine of $25 or be imprisoned twenty five days. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Defendant was convicted in the municipal court of Minneapolis of the offense of practicing dentistry without a license. The case was tried before Waite, J., who found defendant guilty and ordered that defendant pay a fine of $25 or be imprisoned twenty five days. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appealed. The statute under which defendant was prosecuted is unconstitutional, because it attempts to vest both judicial and legislative power in the board of dental examiners in that it authorizes them to ascertain what the law of a foreign state is, to compare it with…
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
The defendant was convicted in the municipal court of the city of Minneapolis of the offense of practicing dentistry without having obtained a certificate of registration as a licensed dentist. He appealed from an order denying his motion for a new trial.
1. It is urged on his behalf that the statute under which he was prosecuted (R. L. 1905, §§ 2313-2319, as amended by Laws 1907, p. 127, c. 117) is unconstitutional, because it attempts to vest in the board of dental examiners both legislative and judicial powers. No question is or can be made as to the constitutionality of the statute…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State ex rel. Young v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- State v. VandersluisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- State v. OredsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
3Cited by3 opinions
- State ex rel. Young v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- State v. GravesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- State v. CrombieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909