State v. Smith
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Tama District Court. — How. L. G. Kmsns, Judge. The defendant was tried and convicted for tlie crime of nuisance committed by polluting tlie water in tlie Iowa river in Tama county, and from a judgment imposing a fine this appeal was taken.
1Opinion of the CourtRoturo cic, J.
I. The defendant demurred to tbe indictment. Tbe demurrer was overruled. Tbe sauU: poiin-diotmentm" sufficiency of tbe indictment is, therefore, the first question proper to be determined, an(3- ^ 1S ILecessary f° set out the instrument. It is in this language: “The'said W. S. Smith, on tbe first day of January, A. D, 1889, and on divers days and times since and up to. tbe time of tbe finding of this indictment, wrongfully and unlawfully did commit, place, deposit, discharge and run into, and cause to be committed, placed, deposited, discharged and run into, a certain creek and stream of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MacloonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- In re EldredWisconsin Supreme Court · 1879
- State v. KasterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1872
- State v. CloseSupreme Court of Iowa · 1872
3Cited by11 opinions
- City of Davenport v. C., R. I. & P. R. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1874
- Hill v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
- State v. WalkerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1975
- City of Dubuque v. C. D. & M. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- State v. Glucose Sugar Refining Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1902
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.