Legal Opinion

United States v. Gaag

District Court, D. Montana

Decided October 26, 1916No. 514PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Edward W.-Gaag was indicted for violation of the Anti-Drug'Act, and he demurs to the indictment.

1Opinion of the Court

BOURQUIN, District Judge.

[1] Indictment presented October 26, 1916. Charge, violation of Anti-Drug Act (38 Stat. 785), in that defenclant, on May 13, 1916, gave an order for opium, which “was thereafter "accepted,” and “after the acceptance” he failed to preserve a duplicate thereof “in such a way as to be readily accessible,” con-,, trary to law. General demurrer; the objection being the offense not alleged of a day certain. The offense would be committed when ready accessibility first failéd after the order’s acceptance and is capable of continuity. It might have been committed prior to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Ledbetter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Weatherby v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1945
  2. State v. IrishSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  3. Territory v. IzumiHawaii Supreme Court · 1937
  4. United States v. StapletonDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API