State v. Lee

Decision Date20 January 1905
Citation74 N.J.L. 852,59 A. 1118
PartiesSTATE v. LEE et al.
CourtNew Jersey Supreme Court

Error to Supreme Court. Uriah S. Lee and others were prosecuted for illegally dredging oysters. Prom a judgment of the Supreme Court, affirming a conviction (57 Atl. 142), they bring error. Affirmed, on opinion of Supreme Court.

James B. Potter and Jonathan W. Acton, for plaintiffs in error.

J. Hampton Fithian and Walter H. Bacon, for the State.

PER CURIAM. The judgment brought up by this writ of error must be affirmed, on the grounds stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice DIXON in the Supreme Court, reported in 57 Atl. 142.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • State v. Smith
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court
    • June 28, 1968
    ...procedural law of New Jersey. State v. James, 96 N.J.L. 132, 144, 114 A. 553, 16 A.L.R. 1141 (E. & A. 1921). See also State v. Lee, 74 N.J.L. 852, 59 A. 1118 (E. & A. 1905), affirmed 207 U.S. 67, 28 S.Ct. 22, 52 L.Ed. 106 (1907). The James case involved a situation in which women were alleg......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT