Legal Opinion

State v. London

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 21, 1920PublishedCited by 3 opinions

From Crook: T. E. J. Duffy, Judge. In Banc. George B. London was convicted, and appealed. Hearing on motion to strike bill of exceptions.

1Opinion of the CourtBenson, J.

The respondent has filed a motion to strike from the record appellant’s bill of exceptions —

*424“For the reason that same has not been settled nor determined in the manner provided by law, and is in nowise a bill of exceptions snch as will comply with the law and the rules of this court.”

The bill of exceptions is sought to be presented under the provisions of Section 170, L. O. L., for the reason that no stenographic or other written record of the testimony was made at the trial, and no record was then made of any objections to the admission of evidence, or exceptions to the rulings of the court…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Fitzhugh v. NirschlOregon Supreme Court · 1915

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Benson v. BirchOregon Supreme Court · 1932
  2. State of Oregon v. YatesOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  3. State v. LondonOregon Supreme Court · 1921

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API