State v. Snowman
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Motion and Exceptions. The defendant was indicted ■ and found guilty of guiding at Rangeley without a license under c. 262 of the statute of 1897, and after verdict moved for an arrest of judgment upon the following grounds; — - (1) The indictment is bad for duplicity; (2) The indictment does not fully set forth the offense intended to be charged; (3) Everything set forth in the indictment may be true, and still the respondent may be innocent; (4) The law is…
Read the full summary
On Motion and Exceptions. The defendant was indicted ■ and found guilty of guiding at Rangeley without a license under c. 262 of the statute of 1897, and after verdict moved for an arrest of judgment upon the following grounds; — - (1) The indictment is bad for duplicity; (2) The indictment does not fully set forth the offense intended to be charged; (3) Everything set forth in the indictment may be true, and still the respondent may be innocent; (4) The law is unconstitutional. The defendant also took exceptions to certain instructions in the charge of the presiding justice which was…
1Opinion of the CourtFogler, J.
The respondent was indicted and tried for an alleged violation of the provisions of Section 1 of Chapter 262, Public Laws of -1897, which reads as follows:
Sect. 1. “No person shall engage in the business of guiding, as the term is commonly understood, before he has caused his name, age, and residence to be recorded in a book kept for that purpose by the commissioners of inland fisheries and game, and procured a certificate from said commissioners, setting forth in substance that he is deemed suitable to act as a guide, either for inland fishing or forest hunting, or both, as the case may be.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Geer v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Manchester v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Ex parte MaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Phelps v. . RaceyNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- State v. RodmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
3Cited by23 opinions
- Vernor v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Harper v. GallowaySupreme Court of Florida · 1909
- Cawsey v. BrickeyWashington Supreme Court · 1914
- State Ex Rel. Campbell v. CaseWashington Supreme Court · 1935
- State v. TiceWashington Supreme Court · 1912
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.