State v. Miller
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The defendant Miller and one Mattie Strickland were-jointly indicted, in the district court for Dakota county, for the offence of lewdly and lasciviously cohabiting together,, not being married to each other, and neither of them being-married.
Read the full summary
The defendant Miller and one Mattie Strickland were-jointly indicted, in the district court for Dakota county, for the offence of lewdly and lasciviously cohabiting together,, not being married to each other, and neither of them being-married. The defendant Miller waived a jury, and was-tried before Orosby, J., the following stipulation as to the-facts of the case having been made between him and the-county attorney: [stipulation.] “It is hereby stipulated, by and between the defendant Leo Miller and the State, as follows : 11 First. That a jury trial is waived on the part of the defendant.…
1Opinion of the CourtCornell, J.
The question sought to be presented and argued by defendant is not properly before us for consideration. The return to the appeal contains no exceptions taken to “any opinion, direction, or judgment” of the court below, and settled, allowed, and made a part of the judgment roll, as prescribed by Gen. St. c. 117, § 6. Hence, the only question which can be considered upon the record before us is as to the sufficiency of the indictment to support the judgment. As appellant- makes no question of this character, and none is apparent to the court, the judgment is affirmed.
2Cited by5 opinions
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- State v. SwanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- State v. WymanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- State v. ShannonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
- Territory v. O'DonnellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1887