State v. Stickney
State of Maine v. Henry Stickney
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Emery, C. J.
The respondent was tried and convicted upon a complaint for a single sale of intoxicating liquor and containing an allegation of a prior conviction of a similar offense. He does not appear to have made any objection before verdict to the sufficiency of that allegation, nor does he appear to have brought the question of its sufficiency to the attention of the court before sentence. After *137 sentence, however, he filed a motion in arrest of judgment upon the ground of the insufficiency of that allegation to warrant the sentence.
The motion cannot be considered. It was filed after judgment, and hence too late. The sentence is the judgment of the court in a criminal case where there is a conviction. A motion in arrest of judgment is not the remedy for the correction of errors in a sentence. Galeo v. State, 107 Maine, 474, 78 At. 867 ; State v. Kibling, 63 Vt. 636 ; State v. O’Neil, 66 Vt. 356 ; Perry v. The People, 14 Ill. 496 ; Territory v. Corbett, 3 Mont. 50 ; Com. v. Swain, 160 Mass. 354 .
Exceptions overruled.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.