People v. Clark
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County and from an order denying a new trial. George E. Church, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtLennon, P. J.
The trial court rightly refused to permit the defendant upon his trial for selling alcoholic liquor in a “no license” territory to have in evidence certain records of the board of supervisors of Fresno County showing the boundaries of Sanger precinct No. 1 and Sanger precinct No. 2, of which precincts the “no license” territory in question formed a part.
The purpose of the proffered proof was to show an alleged irregularity in the proceedings preceding and culminating in the formation of the “no license” territory, which it is asserted, was fatal to the territory’s legal existence, and,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- State v. KlineOregon Supreme Court · 1907
- State v. . CooperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
- Chapman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1897
- Woodard v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- Bowman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1897
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- People v. AdamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- State v. CesarMontana Supreme Court · 1925
- People v. MoralesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- People v. AmortCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- People v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.