Ashcraft v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Perry Circuit Court; Guy Full, Judge; The testimony shows that the vats were blown up and tended to show a physical impossibility to comply with the rules promulgated and the court erred in refusing a jury trial and in excluding all testimony except that which tended to show that appellants failed to dip their cattle. Appellants were certainly entitled to a jury trial, fairly and impartially under proper instructions.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Perry Circuit Court; Guy Full, Judge; The testimony shows that the vats were blown up and tended to show a physical impossibility to comply with the rules promulgated and the court erred in refusing a jury trial and in excluding all testimony except that which tended to show that appellants failed to dip their cattle. Appellants were certainly entitled to a jury trial, fairly and impartially under proper instructions. The indictment charged a misdemeanor only, and the judgment should be reversed, as appellants were, under the Constitution, entitled to a jury trial. This is a…
1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.
The appellants were convicted of the crime of failing to dip their cattle under the rules promulgated by the Board of Control of the Agricultural Experiment Station requiring all persons owning or having charge of any cattle to dip the same every fourteen days after having been notified by the duly authorized inspector having supervision thereof, to dip the cattle at a specified time in a vat or disinfecting station provided for that purpose.
The cases were consolidated and tried as one in the court below and there is a stipulation in the record by which it is agreed that the indictment in the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Mayfield v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Lee v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- Teague v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- Parker v. NicholasSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931