State v. Gates
Oregon Supreme Court
From Union: John W. Knowles, Judge. In Banc. The defendant was tried and convicted, by the verdict of a jury, of the crime of “contributing to the delinquency of a minor.” The verdict of the jury was returned into court on June 24, 1920, and thereafter, on June 26, 1920, and prior to judgment on the verdict, the defendant filed his motion in arrest of judgment on the ground that the indictment does not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime.
Read the full summary
From Union: John W. Knowles, Judge. In Banc. The defendant was tried and convicted, by the verdict of a jury, of the crime of “contributing to the delinquency of a minor.” The verdict of the jury was returned into court on June 24, 1920, and thereafter, on June 26, 1920, and prior to judgment on the verdict, the defendant filed his motion in arrest of judgment on the ground that the indictment does not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime. Having taken the matter under advisement, the court, on August 14, 1920, made and entered an order allowing the motion in arrest of judgment, and…
1Opinion of the CourtBenson, J.
The state assigns two grounds of error: (1) That the motion was not filed within the time prescribed by statute; and (2) that the indictment sufficiently states the facts constituting the crime charged.
1. Considering these in the order mentioned, was the motion filed within the time prescribed in the statute? Section 1559, L. O. L., says:
“Chapters VII and VIII of Title II of the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply to and regulate exceptions and new trials in criminal actions, except that a new trial shall not be granted on the application of the state.”
Section 175, L. O. L., being a part of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. EisenOregon Supreme Court · 1909
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. HaynesOregon Supreme Court · 1925
- State of Oregon v. PEEBLEROregon Supreme Court · 1954
- Ex Parte PackerOregon Supreme Court · 1931
- Phillips v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1929