City of Grand Rapids v. Bateman
Michigan Supreme Court
Exceptions before judgment from superior court of Grand Rapids. (Burlingame, J.) Respondent was convicted of the violation of a city ordinance against the • indecent exposure of the person. Conviction affirmed, and record remanded. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
The defendant was convicted in the police court of Grand Rapids, and upon appeal in the superior court, of indecent exposure of his person. He appeals to this Court from the conviction of the superior court, and contends:
1. That the complaint made against him stated no offense known to the law.
2. That the court erred in trying the case with a jury, the defendant having waived a jury.
1. The complaint against the respondent was for the violation of an ordinance of the city of Grand Rapids, entitled, “An-ordinance relative to the preservation of the public peace and good order in the city of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. RobyMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Commonwealth v. RaymondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Ward v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Commonwealth v. WentworthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
3Cited by9 opinions
- People v. KirbyMichigan Supreme Court · 1992
- In re CoxMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- People v. DiazAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960
- People v. JewellMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
- People v. CurtisMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.