Citation Numbers: 90 A. 183, 122 Md. 642, 1914 Md. LEXIS 90
Judges: Boyd, Briscoe, Burke, Constable, Pattison, Stockbridge, Thomas, Urner
Filed Date: 3/18/1914
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/10/2024
delivered the opinion of the Court.
The appellant in this case was indicted, tried and convicted of a violation of the provisions of Chapter 94 of the Acts of Assembly of 1910. By this appeal the appellant raises the question of the constitutionality of the Act.
The facts and points raised are identical with those presented in Sweeten v. State, ante, page 634, argued on the same day. An opinion has been filed in that case, setting out the reasons for affirming the judgment, and we deem it unnecessary to do other in this case than refer to the opinion therein filed for the reasons why we affirm the judgment in this case.
Judgment affirmed, with costs t& the appellee.
Stockbridge, J., dissented.
Ruark v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local ... , 157 Md. 576 ( 1929 )
Mayor of Baltimore v. Employers' Ass'n of Maryland, Inc. , 162 Md. 124 ( 1932 )
Pencader Associates, Inc. v. Glasgow Trust , 1982 Del. LEXIS 403 ( 1982 )
Richard Paul, Inc. v. Union Improvement Co. , 33 Del. Ch. 113 ( 1952 )
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California v. ... , 215 Cal. 400 ( 1932 )