Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Law
Crimes-Mistake Of Facts Of A Defense
Crimes-Mistake Of Facts Of A Defense
Michigan Law Review
The defendant was convicted of bigamy under the usual statute (in this case, Fla. Comp, L., 1927, secs. 7559-7660) punishing as bigamous any person remarrying while the former spouse was still living, unless that spouse had been absent three years, the party remarrying not knowing the other to be alive during that time, or unless a legal divorce had been granted. The defense was, that as the defendant's first wife had told him and others that she had secured a divorce and had remarried, and had introduced to him her second husband, he honestly believed her. It was held, …
Crimes-Former Jeopardy-Prosecution In Two Counties For A Continuous Act
Crimes-Former Jeopardy-Prosecution In Two Counties For A Continuous Act
Michigan Law Review
Defendants transported liquor by a single, uninterrupted act from A county to B county in the same state. Having been convicted and fined in B county for the transportation within its boundaries, they were later indicted in A county for that part of the transportation which took place in that territory. A plea of former jeopardy was sustained by the trial judge, and on appeal this holding was affirmed by a divided court, which held, the act constituted a single offense, punishable in either county, but not in both. State v. Shimman et al. (Ohio, 1930) 172 N.E. 367.
Crimes - Venue- Non-Support, Abandonment, And Desertion
Crimes - Venue- Non-Support, Abandonment, And Desertion
Michigan Law Review
Defendant was divorced by his wife in A county in 1926. In 1929, defendant was indicted for non-support of his children, in B county, where his former wife and the children had maintained their home since the divorce. An objection to the venue was raised by the defense, on the ground that, if a crime was committed, it was consummated in A county, where defendant had been living during the time he was charged with non-support. Held, that "the venue of non-support is where that support should be rendered." State v. Anderson (Or. 1930) 290 Pac. 1904