Heier v. State
Heier v. State of Indiana
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.
Townsend, J.
— Appellant was convicted of a violation of what is commonly known as the “Blind Tiger” Law and sentenced to pay a fine of $100 and imprisoned in the county jail for thirty days.
It is his contention that he should have been sentenced *173 to the penal farm. He attempts to present this question by a motion for a new trial.
An objection to place of imprisonment should have been presented by a motion to modify the judgment. Hunt v. State (1917), 186 Ind. 644 , 117 N. E. 856 .
Judgment affirmed.
Note. — Reported in 122 N. E. 578 . See 97 Am. St. 371, 16 C. J. 1314.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.