State v. Anderson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Anderson

61 N.W. 448, 59 Minn. 484, 1894 Minn. LEXIS 191

Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided December 21, 1894·No. No. 9222·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The points raised by the assignments of error and argued by counsel for appellant are not before us, for the return fails to show that any order or judgment upon the conviction has ever been made. We are advised by the record that defendant was found guilty, that a stay of proceedings was granted, a case settled, and subsequently a motion for a new trial made and denied. There is nothing to show that the court below revoked or attempted to revoke defendant’s license, as provided in the city charter (Sp. Laws 1881, ch. 76, subch. 4, § 16); and appellant’s argument is wholly devoted to the power of the court to revoke his license.

Appeal dismissed.

(Opinion published 61 N. W. 448.)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The points raised by the assignments of error and argued by counsel for appellant are not before us, for the return fails to show that any order or judgment upon the conviction has ever been made. We are advised by the record that defendant was found guilty, that a stay of proceedings was granted, a case settled, and subsequently a motion for a new trial made and denied. There is nothing to show that the court below revoked or attempted to revoke defendant’s license, as provided in the city charter (Sp. Laws 1881, ch. 76, subch. 4, § 16); and appellant’s argument is wholly devoted to the power of the court to revoke his license.

Appeal dismissed.

(Opinion published 61 N. W. 448.)

State v. Anderson, 61 N.W. 448, 59 Minn. 484, 1894 Minn. LEXIS 191 (Mich. 1894).

Pincite

61 N.W. 448 (State v. Anderson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related