State v. Wyman

State of Minnesota v. J. K. Wyman

State v. Wyman, 43 N.W. 1116 (Minn. 1889)

Court: Supreme Court of Minnesota · State Highest Courts
Decided: December 20, 1889
Judges: Vanderburgh
Citations: 43 N.W. 111642 Minn. 1821889 Minn. LEXIS 226

Cited by 2

Headnotes

Intoxicating Liquor — Sale without License — Indictment.—In an indictment for selling liquors without a license, a charge that the defendant sold “one gill of whiskey” sufficiently defines the quantity, and shows that it was less than five gallons. Appeal — Bill of Exceptions, when Required. — Where there is no bill of exceptions contained in the record, no question will be considered in this court, except as to the sufficiency of the indictment to support the judgment.

Summary

Writ of error to the district court for Waseca county, where defendant was convicted on a trial before Buckham, J., and a jury, and sentenced to pay a fine of $ 100 and costs, and be committed to the county jail for 30 days. The record contains no bill of exceptions, but contains a statement of evidence and of the charge at the trial, certified by the clerk of the court, and not showing any exceptions taken by defendant.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Vanderburgh

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Vanderburgh, J.

Indictment for selling intoxicating liquors without a license. The first assignment of error is that the indictment does not show that the quantity of liquor sold was less than five gallons. This is the only objection to the indictment. The amount specified as having been so sold is one gill of whiskey. This, however, sufficiently defines the quantity sold, and on the face of the indictment shows that it was within the statutory limit. State v. Lavake, *183 26 Minn. 526 , ( 6 N. W. Rep. 339 .) The other questions in the caso are such as could only be raised upon a bill of exceptions duly settled and allowed by the trial judge, as required by Gen. St. 1878, c. 117, § 6. But there is no bill of exceptions in the record, and the minutes of the evidence have no place in the record, and cannot be considered here. State v. Miller, 23 Minn. 352 .

Judgment affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 2 cases

View all citing references →

State Highest Courts2

Relies on it most ⓘ

State v. Swan186 N.W. 581 (Minn. 1922)
State v. Shannon51 N.W.2d 824 (Minn. 1952)

Most recent

State v. Shannon51 N.W.2d 824 (Minn. 1952)
State v. Swan186 N.W. 581 (Minn. 1922)

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.

Authorities cited 2

Depth	Case	Cited by
	State v. Lavake, 6 N.W. 339 (Minn. 1880)	7
	State v. Miller, 23 Minn. 352 (1877)	5

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list