People v. Haas
Michigan Supreme Court
Exceptions before judgment from Hillsdale. (Lane, J.) ■ Respondent was convicted of engaging in the business of selling liquor without having complied with the provisions of the law of 1887. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.
The respondent was convicted in the Hills-dale circuit court upon an information charging him with engaging in the business of selling and keeping for sale spirituous, malt, brewed, and fermented liquors, the same not being then and there proprietary patent medicines, at retail, without having paid his tax, posted his notice, and filed his bond as required by statute; the said Haas not being then and there a druggist. The respondent offered no evidence upon the trial, but relies upon certain' alleged defects in the people's case, and errors assigned as occurring in the admission and rejection…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Allor v. Board of AuditorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- People v. HeffronMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Luton v. Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- People v. SchotteyMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- People v. TelfordMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
3Cited by14 opinions
- People v. CzckayMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
- Phillips v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1926
- Ray v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1929
- Denton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1937
- People v. GaultMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.