State v. Bailey
This text of 91 P. 1066 (State v. Bailey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The appellant was convicted in the district court of Allen county of. a violation of the prohibitory liquor law. The appeal is based entirely on an alleged error of the court in denying the appellant’s motion for a continuance. The affidavit filed in support of the motion fails to show diligence in an effort to obtain the desired evidence. The evidence was desired to dispute a witness for the state whose name, it is to be presumed, was indorsed upon the information. Due diligence required the appellant to prepare, in advance of the trial, to rebut the evidence which such witness might give of a transaction which the appellant knew, as shown by the affidavit, occurred in the presence of the absent witness and the witness who testified for the state.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
91 P. 1066, 77 Kan. 850, 1908 Kan. LEXIS 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bailey-kan-1907.