Legal Opinion
People v. Strickler
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 30, 1914No. Crim. No. 226PublishedCited by 17 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, and J. Charles Jones, Deputy Attorney-General, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
The information in this case, purporting to accuse the defendant of a violation of the so-called Wyllie Local Option Law, reads as follows:
“The said H. L. Strickler on the 7th day of March nineteen hundred and thirteen at and in the County of Colusa, state of California, and prior to the filing of this information did willfully and unlawfully keep and conduct in the town of Arbuckle and within the boundaries of first supervisor district of said Colusa County, state of California, a certain place where alcoho.lic liquors were by him then and there sold, served and distributed within the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Misch v. RussellIllinois Supreme Court · 1891
- State v. FredericksonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1905
- People v. MuellerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
3Cited by17 opinions
- Jacob Ruppert v. CaffeySupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- County of Placer v. CorinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- State v. Centennial Brewing Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1919
- Helping Hand Home for Children v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- People v. BickerstaffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.