Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Nugent, 121 N.W. 898.

26 citing documents.

City of St. Paul v. Tobler 153 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 1967
City of St. Paul v. Tobler 153 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 1967
3 See, State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , ; City of St.
State Ex Rel. Duhn v. Tahash 147 N.W.2d 382 Minn. 1966
State Ex Rel. Duhn v. Tahash 147 N.W.2d 382 Minn. 1966
Brown v. Fitzgerald, 51 Minn. 534 , ; State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , ; State v. Warner, 165 Minn. 79 , ; State v. Abdu, 173 Minn. 95 , ; State ex rel.
City of St. Paul v. Ulmer 111 N.W.2d 612 Minn. 1961
City of St. Paul v. Ulmer 111 N.W.2d 612 Minn. 1961
See, State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , ; State v. Binder, 190 Minn. 305 , ; 5 Dunnell, Dig.
State v. Hoben 98 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 1959
State v. Hoben 98 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 1959
er this section shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten days nor more than 90 days, and his driver’s license shall be revoked for not less than 90 days.” 3 City of Mankato v. Arnold, 36 Minn. 62 , ; State v. Grimes, 83 Minn. 460 , ; State v. Marciniak, 97 Minn. 355 , , affirmed, 207 U. S. 584 , 28 S. Ct. 262 , 52 L. ed. 351; State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , ; State v. Broms, 139 Minn. 402 , ; City of St.
City of St. Paul v. Webb 97 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 1959
City of St. Paul v. Webb 97 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 1959
In State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , , defendant was convicted of violating a city ordinance prohibiting sale of intoxicating liquor to minors and appealed from the judgment.
State Ex Rel. Adams v. Rigg 89 N.W.2d 898 Minn. 1958
State Ex Rel. Adams v. Rigg 89 N.W.2d 898 Minn. 1958
Hansen v. Utecht, 230 Minn. 579 , 40 N. W. (2d) 441 ; State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , ; State v. Binder, 190 Minn. 305 , ; 5 Dunnell, Dig.
State Ex Rel. Schwanke v. Utecht 47 N.W.2d 99 Minn. 1951
State Ex Rel. Schwanke v. Utecht 47 N.W.2d 99 Minn. 1951
State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , ; State v. Binder, 190 Minn. 305 , ; 2 Dunnell, Dig.
City of St. Paul v. Stovall 30 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 1948
City of St. Paul v. Stovall 30 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 1948
In State v. Volk, 144 Minn. 223, 225 , , Mr. Justice Holt quoted with approval Commonwealth v. Tay, 170 Mass. 192, 193 , 48 N. E. 1086 , where it was stated: “* * * If she [the defendant] was illegally arrested, she had her remedy by action for that wrong, and the illegal arrest did not prevent the court from acquiring jurisdiction to try the complaint.” In State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , , while the fact situation was not exactly the same as in the case at bar, it was held *312 that the court
State Ex Rel. Connolly v. Parks 273 N.W. 233 Minn. 1937
State Ex Rel. Connolly v. Parks 273 N.W. 233 Minn. 1937
State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , ; State ex rel.
State v. Binder 251 N.W. 665 Minn. 1933
State v. Binder 251 N.W. 665 Minn. 1933
“The only function of the warrant in a criminal case is to enable the court to acquire jurisdiction of the person of the defendant by bringing him before the court to answer the charge made against him.” State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267, 269 , .
State v. Chandler 197 N.W. 847 Minn. 1924
State v. Chandler 197 N.W. 847 Minn. 1924
890; State v. Fitzgerald, 51 Minn. 534 , ; State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , ; State v. Volk, 144 Minn. 233 , ; State v. Day, 58 Iowa, 678 , ; Baker v. State, 88 Wis.
State v. Volk 174 N.W. 883 Minn. 1919
State v. Volk 174 N.W. 883 Minn. 1919
“The only function of the warrant in a criminal case is to enable the court to acquire jurisdiction of the person of the defendant by bringing him before the court to answer the charge made against him.” State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , .
State v. Lundgren 144 N.W. 752 Minn. 1913
State v. Lundgren 144 N.W. 752 Minn. 1913
State v. Nugent, 108 Minn. 267 , , arose under the statute now before us, but the question of sale by a barkeeper without authority was not involved.