State v. Juretish

286 P. 962, 75 Utah 565, 1930 Utah LEXIS 35
CourtUtah Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 20, 1930
DocketNo. 4949.
StatusPublished

This text of 286 P. 962 (State v. Juretish) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Utah 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. Juretish, 286 P. 962, 75 Utah 565, 1930 Utah LEXIS 35 (Utah 1930).

Opinion

ELIAS HANSEN, J.

The defendant in this action was found guilty of receiving money from the proceeds of the earnings of a woman engaged in prostitution. He was sentenced to serve an indeterminate term in the state prison. He appeals. The charging part of the information filed against the defendant reads as follows:

“That the said Mike Juretish, on the 1st day of April, A. D. 1929, at the County of Salt Lake, State of Utah, did wilfully, unlawfully, knowingly, and feloniously accept and receive from one, May Good- *566 mansen of the age of nineteen years the sum of $4.00 said sum being the earnings of her, the said May Goodmansen, received by her while engaged in prostitution, and the said Mike Juretish, then and there knowing that said sum was the earnings of the said May Goodmansen, while so engaged as aforesaid; contrary to the provisions of the Statute of the State aforesaid, in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Utah.”

The defendant in the trial court unsuccessfully assailed the sufficiency of the information to state a public offense. He here contends that the trial court was in error in holding that the information does state a public offense. The information filed in this case is fatally defective for the same reasons that the information in the case of State v. Rex Lund, 286 P. 960, just decided by this court, was fatally defective.

The judgment appealed from is reversed, and the cause remanded to the district court of Salt Lake county for such further proceedings, not inconsistent with this opinion, as may be proper.

CHERRY, C. J., and STRAUP, EPHRAIM HANSON', and FOLLAND, JJ., concur.

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

Related

State v. Lund
286 P. 960 (Utah Supreme Court, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
286 P. 962, 75 Utah 565, 1930 Utah LEXIS 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-juretish-utah-1930.