Legal Opinion

State v. King

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 21, 1948No. 4310PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.

Denial of his challenge to the array is the only complaint now urged by the defendant, appellant herein, to the judgment of the Municipal Court of Toledo convicting him on a second-offense charge of practicing medicine in Toledo without a license, in violation of Section 12694, General Code, under which imprisonment may be a part of the punishment.

He having duly demanded and been granted a trial by jury, the court summoned the jurors as provided in the Municipal Court of Toledo Act, Section 1579-301, General Code, a part of which, provides: “Jurors in the Municipal Court shall be chosen and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ruthenberg v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  2. Holub v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1933
  3. State v. PartanenOhio Court of Appeals · 1940
  4. Village of New Miami v. WhiteOhio Court of Appeals · 1943

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. KapposSupreme Court of Iowa · 1971
  2. State v. KapposSupreme Court of Iowa · 1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API