Legal Opinion

State v. Hedstrom

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 19, 1951No. 35,301, 35,302PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Frank T. Gallagher, Justice.

Appeals from judgments of the district court entered against de fendants adjudging them guilty of the offense of attempting to take mink with the use of a dog and by digging, molesting and injuring a muskrat runway by digging into the same with a shovel. The appeals are taken on the ground that the judgments and sentences are unlawful, in that they are based upon the complaints in these proceedings, which complaints were demurred to on the ground that they were duplicitous.

Separate complaints were made in justice court charging that on December 14, 1949, at the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. Gopher Tire & Rubber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  2. Marsh v. WebberSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1868
  3. State v. MooreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
  4. Humphrey v. BuissonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
  5. State v. HoskinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. HolmesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
  2. State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API