State v. Winegar
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.
The question here presented is whether the provision of the statute is valid under which defendant was convicted. Its constitutionality is challenged by defendant. Defendant also contends that, assuming it to be constitutional, it cannot be lawfully applied to defendant.
The provisions of the statute to which reference is thus made comprise the penultimate subdivision of chapter 58, Oregon Laws, Second Special Session, 1933.
Said chapter 58 is an amendment of section 40-515, Oregon Code 1930, as amended by section 12, chapter 286, Oregon Laws 1933. It prescribes the respective amounts to be…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Adams Express Company v. CroningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Packard v. BantonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Woodruff v. ParhamSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Sonneborn Brothers v. CuretonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- New Mexico Ex Rel. E. J. McLean & Co. v. Denver & Rio Grande RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Jarvill v. City of EugeneOregon Supreme Court · 1980
- Columbia River Packers Ass'n, Inc. v. HintonDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1939
- Jarvill v. City of EugeneOregon Supreme Court · 1980