Junction City v. Keeffe
Decision Date | 10 November 1888 |
Citation | 40 Kan. 275,19 P. 735 |
Parties | THE CITY OF JUNCTION CITY v. THOMAS KEEFFE |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Davis District Court.
PROSECUTION upon the charge of being the keeper of a place where intoxicating liquors are unlawfully kept and stored in violation of an ordinance of Junction City. Judgment for defendant Keeffe, at the March term, 1888. The City appeals. The opinion states the facts.
Cause reversed and remanded.
Thomas Dever, for appellant.
J. R McClure, and James Ketner, for defendant.
OPINION
This action was commenced in the police court of the city of Junction City, by filing a complaint, which, after the caption, is as follows:
The police judge issued the following warrant, which is, after omitting caption:
The premises above described were searched by the officer, and a large quantity of beer, whisky and gin was found thereon. Thomas Keeffe, the defendant, was arrested and brought before the police judge. At his request the cause was continued for several days, and he entered into a recognizance for his appearance. On the day to which it was continued, the defendant moved to quash the complaint and warrant, which was overruled by the court. The case was continued from time to time before it was tried, when the defendant was found guilty and sentenced to pay a fine of $ 100 and the costs of the prosecution, and to be confined in the jail of Davis county for thirty days. From that judgment the defendant appealed to the district court, where a motion was made to quash the warrant, which was overruled, and the cause continued. At the March term, 1888, the following motion was made, which is, after caption:
"And now comes the defendant and renews his motion to quash the warrant issued for the arrest of the defendant in this case, for the following reasons: 1st, that said warrant was improvidently and illegally issued; 2d, that said defendant was arrested without any authority of law, and without any proper warrant."
This motion was sustained, and the defendant Keeffe was discharged without day. The state appeals.
The defendant contends that the judgment of the district court discharging him does not fall within any of the cases in which the state may appeal to the supreme court, namely: Upon a judgment for the defendant on quashing or setting aside an indictment or information; upon an order of the court arresting the judgment; or, upon a question reserved by the state. He claims that it cannot be upon a question reserved by the state, owing to the phraseology of § 288 of the criminal code:
"In case of an appeal from a question reserved on the part of the state, it is not necessary for the clerk of the court below to certify, in the transcript, any part of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Allen
... ... McKeever, of Topeka, for the appellant ... L. A ... Madison, of Dodge City, E. R. Thorpe, of Lakin, Edgar Foster, ... of Garden City, Nellie Cline, and G. Polk Cline, both ... "a question reserved by the state." This expression ... has received attention in Junction City v. Keeffe, ... 40 Kan. 275, 19 P. 735, The State v. Rook, 61 Kan ... 382, 59 P. 653, ... ...
-
Koch v. Dist. Court of Des Moines Cnty.
...v. Clark, 34 Kan. 289, 8 Pac. 528;State v. Bjorkland, 34 Kan. 377, 8 Pac. 391;State v. Longton, 35 Kan. 375, 11 Pac. 163;Junction City v. Keefe, 40 Kan. 275, 19 Pac. 735;State v. Ladenberger, 44 Kan. 261, 24 Pac. 347;State v. Tuchman, 47 Kan. 726, 28 Pac. 1004.” Having held the information ......
-
State v. The Missouri Pacific Railway Company
... ... an acquittal is not a prerequisite. ( Junction City v ... Keeffe , 40 Kan. 275, 19 P. 735; The State v ... Rook , 61 Kan. 382, 59 P. 653; ... ...
-
Koch v. District Court of Des Moines County
...v. Clark, 34 Kan. 289 (8 P. 528); State v. Bjorkland, 34 Kan. 377 (8 P. 391); State v. Longton, 35 Kan. 375 (11 P. 163); Junction City v. Keeffe, 40 Kan. 275 (19 P. 735); State v. Ladenberger, 44 Kan. 261 (24 P. State v. Tuchman, 47 Kan. 726 (28 P. 1004). Having held the information suffici......