State v. Harned

61 A. 5, 72 N.J.L. 353, 43 Vroom 353, 1905 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 53
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided June 12, 1905·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Fort, J.

This case is determined by the opinion in the case of State v. Davis, decided at this present term. ,The only difference in the two cases is that the defendant in this case shot at a pigeon as a target and missed it. He intended to hit it. He did not. Such shooting, under the statute, is a misdemeanor.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

State v. Harned, 61 A. 5, 72 N.J.L. 353, 43 Vroom 353, 1905 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 53 (N.J. 1905).

61 A. 5 (State v. Harned) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Njspca v. Bd. of Ed. of East Orange
219 A.2d 200 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1966)