Legal Opinion
State v. London
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided February 1, 1921PublishedCited by 3 opinions
From Crook ^ T. E. J. Duffy, Judge. In Banc. The defendant was convicted of the crime of selling intoxicating liquor, and from a judgment thereon, he prosecutes this appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtBenson, J.
1. The bill of exceptions was stricken from the record in this case, for the reason that the same was not settled and determined in the. manner provided by law: State v. London, 97 Or. 423 (192 Pac. 489).
There being no bill of exceptions, the only assignment of error remaining to be considered is the defendant’s contention that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime. The complaint, omitting the formal parts, reads thus:
“The said George B. London, on the ninth day of July, A. D. 1919, in the county of Crook and State of Oregon, then and there being, did then and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. LondonOregon Supreme Court · 1920
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. RosascoOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Pack v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 1925
- People v. CookMichigan Supreme Court · 1925