State v. Bariger

Idaho Supreme Court

State v. Bariger

227 P. 34, 39 Idaho 328

CourtIdaho Supreme Court

DecidedJune 30, 1924

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 227 P. 34 (State v. Bariger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Bariger, 227 P. 34, 39 Idaho 328 (Idaho 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

BUDGE, J.

An information was filed against appellant in which he was charged with the crime of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor. To this information appellant entered a plea of “Not Guilty.” He was subsequently placed on trial and by the verdict of the jury was found guilty as charged. Thereafter judgment of conviction was duly entered and sentence pronounced. From the judgment and from an order overruling a motion for a new trial this appeal is prosecuted.

The transcript on appeal was filed in this court on the 8th day of February, 1924. Appellant has filed no brief. When the cause was reached upon the calendar and set down for hearing appellant was not present nor represented by counsel. Upon this state of the record, and in accordance with Rule 48 of this court the record has been examined for fundamental error. No fundamental error appearing the judgment, must be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

McCarthy, C. J., and William A. Lee and Wm. E. Lee, JJ., concur.

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

BUDGE, J.

An information was filed against appellant in which he was charged with the crime of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor. To this information appellant entered a plea of “Not Guilty.” He was subsequently placed on trial and by the verdict of the jury was found guilty as charged. Thereafter judgment of conviction was duly entered and sentence pronounced. From the judgment and from an order overruling a motion for a new trial this appeal is prosecuted.

The transcript on appeal was filed in this court on the 8th day of February, 1924. Appellant has filed no brief. When the cause was reached upon the calendar and set down for hearing appellant was not present nor represented by counsel. Upon this state of the record, and in accordance with Rule 48 of this court the record has been examined for fundamental error. No fundamental error appearing the judgment, must be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

McCarthy, C. J., and William A. Lee and Wm. E. Lee, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 P. 34, 39 Idaho 328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bariger-idaho-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack