Legal Opinion

People v. Smith

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 18, 1898PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Exceptions before judgment from Berrien; Coolidge, J. Charles A. Smith was convicted of violating the liquor law.

1Opinion of the Court

Grant, O. J.

Respondent was indicted by a grand jury of Berrien county for keeping his saloon open on Sunday, contrary to section 17 .of the state liquor law (3 How. Stat. § 2283e), tried, and convicted. Two questions are presented: (1) Was the grand jury a legal body? (2) Is the violation of the liquor law of the State an indictable offense ?

The statute is conclusive of the first question. The objections relate to irregularities in the drawing of the jury. The statute specifies what shall be a ground of challenge, viz., that a juror is prosecutor or complainant. It expressly prohibits a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. LauderMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  2. People v. StevensNew York Supreme Court · 1835
  3. Keller v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1857
  4. People v. J. & S. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1837

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Eureka County Bank Habeas Corpus CasesNevada Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Gridley v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
  3. People v. ThompsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
  4. People v. LayMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
  5. People v. ReigelMichigan Supreme Court · 1899

1 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