Legal Opinion

State v. Albertson

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided November 25, 1910PublishedCited by 23 opinions

Appeal from District Court, Burleigh county; Honorable W. HI Winchester, J. Action by the State of North Dakota against C. H. Albertson. From an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial, defendant appeals. General powers of a court authorize a bill of particulars in criminal cases. Com. v. Snelling, 15 Pick. 321; Bex v. Hodgson, 3 Oar. & P. 422; Bex v. Bootyman, 5 Car. & P. 300; State v. Conlin, 27 Yt. 323;. State v. Freeman, 27 Yt. 525; State y.

Read the full summary

1Opinion of the CourtCarmody, J.

Appellant was, on the 26th day of May, 1910, convicted by a jury in the district court of Burleigh county of keeping and maintaining a common nuisance, in violation of § 9373, Rev. Codes 1905. There is no specific place set forth in the information where the nuisance was kept, but it alleges only that it was kept at a certain place located in the city of Bismarck,' in Burleigh county, Noi’th Dakota. The defendant demanded a bill of particulars showing the description of the place, building, or other structure where the alleged nuisance was kept, the kinds of liquor sold, when and to whom…

2Cases cited16 opinions

State v. KentNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1896
People v. HallMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
State v. WrightNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
State v. ChurchSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
Stoakes v. MonroeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

State v. BickfordNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913
State v. CrayNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
State v. ThompsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
State v. YoungNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1927
State v. KilmerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.