State v. Smith
This text of 127 P. 691 (State v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
The defendant, Perry Smith, was convicted of the crime of selling intoxicating liquor in Crook County in violation of the local option law, and he appeals from the judgment rendered against him. It was stipulated herein, and also in the following cases in which the hereinafter named defendants were severally convicted of the same offense, alleged to have been committed in that county, and individually appeals, to wit: State v. Harry Geener, State v. Dave Biggerstaff, State v. Billy McGee, State v. George Gardner, State v. George Atwell, State [293]*293v. George B. Brown, and State v. William Snell and James Green, that the decision rendered in the case of State v. Ramsey, 63 Or. 291 (127 Pac. 691), should govern the determination of each of these causes.
It results, therefore, that the judgments thus rendered against the several defendants should be affirmed, and it is so ordered. Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
127 P. 691, 63 Or. 292, 1912 Ore. LEXIS 232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-smith-or-1912.