Legal Opinion

Ex parte Swann

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided April 15, 1888PublishedCited by 35 opinions

Habeas corpus. (1) The provisions of this act contravene section twenty-five, article two, of the bill of rights of the state of Missouri, which provides “that excessive bail shall not be required nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.”

Read the full summary

Habeas corpus. (1) The provisions of this act contravene section twenty-five, article two, of the bill of rights of the state of Missouri, which provides “that excessive bail shall not be required nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.” Also article eight of the amendments to the constitution of the United States, which provides that ‘ ‘ excessive bail shall not be required nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.” It inflicts punishment different from and in excess of that prescribed by the “Downing act,” which is the law of…

1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.

The act of April 5, 1887, entitled “An act to provide for the prevention of the evils of intemperance by local option,” etc., was adopted, by a majority vote, as the law of all that part of Pike county outside of the city of Louisiana, a city of more than twenty-five hundred inhabitants.

Public notice of the result of the election was duly given. Thereafter the petitioner Flem Swann was, by a justice of the peace, found guilty of selling intoxicating liquors in violation of the law. The justice assessed the punishment at a fine of three hundred dollars and three hundred and sixty-five days…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hayes v. MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  2. Missouri v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  3. Grandy v. CaseySupreme Court of Missouri · 1887

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. People v. ElliottIllinois Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Ex parte SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
  3. Sustar v. County CourtOregon Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Feek v. Township Board of BloomingdaleMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  5. State v. WingfieldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893

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

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

Powered by the Exa API