State v. Kampman

75 Mo. App. 188, 1898 Mo. App. LEXIS 407
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 2, 1898·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Ellison, J. —

Defendant was convicted of selling intoxicating liquor without a license in the county of Harrison in violation of the local option law. It appears that the notice for an election to determine [189] whether such law would be adopted in Harrison county was published in four consecutive issues of a weekly newspaper in said county; but that counting the day of the first publication to the day of election there was only twenty-three days notice. We have repeatedly held that the statute intends that there shall be twenty-eight days notice in order that there may be a valid election. It thus appearing that there was no local option law in. Harrison county to be violated the defendant was improperly convicted. State ex rel. v. Tucker, 32 Mo. App. 620; Bean v. Co. Ct., 33 Mo. App. 635; State v. Kaufman, 45 Mo. App. 656. The .judgment will be reversed and the defendant discharged.

All concur.

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

State v. Kampman, 75 Mo. App. 188, 1898 Mo. App. LEXIS 407 (Mo. Ct. App. 1898).

75 Mo. App. 188 (State v. Kampman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State Ex Rel. City of Berkeley v. Holmes
219 S.W.2d 650 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1949)
Hill v. Hartzell
252 P. 552 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1926)
Standefer v. Dykeman
132 S.W. 752 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
State ex rel. Hennesmeyer v. Reid
114 S.W. 1116 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
Guernsey v. McHaley
98 P. 158 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1908)
State v. Brown
109 S.W. 99 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
State v. Swearingen
107 S.W. 1 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
State v. Dobbins
92 S.W. 136 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1906)
State ex rel. v. Martin
83 Mo. App. 55 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1900)