Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Lee, 13 N.W. 913.

44 citing documents.

City of St. Paul v. Whidby 203 N.W.2d 823 Minn. 1972
City of St. Paul v. Whidby 203 N.W.2d 823 Minn. 1972
Paul v. Azzone, 287 Minn. 136 , City of Bloomington v. Kossow, 269 Minn. 467 , State v. Miller, 253 Minn. 112 , State v. Ketterer, 248 Minn. 173 , State v. Nelson, 157 Minn. 506 , State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445
State v. Hoben 98 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 1959
State v. Hoben 98 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 1959
State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , ; State v. Oleson, 26 Minn. 507 , ; State v. Cavett, 171 *440 Minn. 505, ; State v. Stevens, 247 Minn. 67 , 75 N. W. (2d) 903 ; Note, 36 Minn. L. Rev. 143 .
State v. Ketterer 79 N.W.2d 136 Minn. 1956
State v. Ketterer 79 N.W.2d 136 Minn. 1956
4 State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445, 452 , ; State v. Robitshek, 60 Minn. 123, 125 , , 33 L. R. A. 33; City of St.
State v. Stevens 75 N.W.2d 903 Minn. 1956
State v. Stevens 75 N.W.2d 903 Minn. 1956
State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , ; State ex rel.
State v. End 45 N.W.2d 378 Minn. 1950
State v. End 45 N.W.2d 378 Minn. 1950
6 43 C. J., Municipal Corporations, § 608, notes 30 and 31, citing State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , , and Village of Crosby v. Stemich, 160 Minn. 261 , , and other cases; 62 C. J. S., Municipal Corporations, § 316, and cases cited under notes 72 and 73.
Orme v. Atlas Gas and Oil Co. 13 N.W.2d 757 Minn. 1944
Orme v. Atlas Gas and Oil Co. 13 N.W.2d 757 Minn. 1944
State v. Mandehr, 168 Minn. 139 , ; State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , 4 Dunnell, Dig.
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. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , .
State v. Hughes 233 N.W. 874 Minn. 1930
State v. Hughes 233 N.W. 874 Minn. 1930
State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , ; State ex rel.
State v. Cavett 214 N.W. 479 Minn. 1927
State v. Cavett 214 N.W. 479 Minn. 1927
That a person may be prosecuted and convicted for an act denounced as a crime by a statute and also be liable to prosecution therefor under a municipal ordinance which makes the same act an offense is thoroughly settled law since State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , .
State v. Mandehr 209 N.W. 750 Minn. 1926
State v. Mandehr 209 N.W. 750 Minn. 1926
These rules were first announced in State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , .
State Ex Rel. Strupp v. Anderson 206 N.W. 51 Minn. 1925
State Ex Rel. Strupp v. Anderson 206 N.W. 51 Minn. 1925
we are concerned with evils such as that of intemperance, which has a definitely local aspect because of the community disorder and deterioration which always attend it, we shall not depart from the wholesome rule adopted in State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , .
City of Red Wing v. Nibbe 199 N.W. 918 Minn. 1924
City of Red Wing v. Nibbe 199 N.W. 918 Minn. 1924
State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , ; City of Mankato v. Arnold, 36 Minn. 62 , ; State v. Sexton, 42 Minn. 154 , ; State v. Harris, 50 Minn. 128 , ; State v. Robitshek, 60 Minn. 123 , , 33 L. R. A. 33; State v. Grimes, 83 Minn. 460 , ; State v. Marciniak, 97 Minn. 355
State v. Nelson 196 N.W. 279 Minn. 1923
State v. Nelson 196 N.W. 279 Minn. 1923
In State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445, 457 , , it was said of an ordinance against operating a house of ill-fame “this ordinance is satisfied with a less degree or quantity of evidence than is required on the trial of the offense under the general law, (which must be beyond reasonable doubt).” A defendant is not entitled to a jury trial when
In re Mason 181 N.W. 570 Minn. 1920
In re Mason 181 N.W. 570 Minn. 1920
See also State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , ; State v. Harris, 50 Minn. 128 , ; City of Virginia v. Erickson, 141 Minn. 21 , .
City of Virginia v. Erickson 168 N.W. 821 Minn. 1918
City of Virginia v. Erickson 168 N.W. 821 Minn. 1918
State v. Ludwig, 21 Minn. 202 ; State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , ; State v. Harris, 50 Minn. 128 , ; State v. Lindquist, 77 Minn. 540 , ; City of Jordan v. Nicolin, 84 Minn. 367 , 87 N, W. 915; State v. Marciniak, 97 Minn. 355 , ; 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
State v. Holm 166 N.W. 181 Minn. 1918
State v. Holm 166 N.W. 181 Minn. 1918
Ct. 92, 47 L. ed. 108; State v. Oleson, 26 Minn. 507 , ; State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , .
State ex rel. Young v. Robinson 112 N.W. 269 Minn. 1907
State ex rel. Young v. Robinson 112 N.W. 269 Minn. 1907
This rule is illustrated by the case of State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , , where the court held that a prosecution under an ordinance of the city of St.
State v. Lindquist 80 N.W. 701 Minn. 1899
State v. Lindquist 80 N.W. 701 Minn. 1899
State v. Ludwig, 21 Minn. 202 ; State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , .
State v. Robitshek 61 N.W. 1023 Minn. 1895
State v. Robitshek 61 N.W. 1023 Minn. 1895
Paul v. Smith, 27 Minn. 364 , ; State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , ; City of Mankato,, v. Arnold, 36 Minn. 62 , ; State v. West, 42 Minn. 147 , ; State v. Sexton, 42 Minn. 154 , ; State v. Harris, 50 Minn. 128 , .
State v. Harris 52 N.W. 387 Minn. 1892
State v. Harris 52 N.W. 387 Minn. 1892
Such is the effect of the decisions of this court in State v. Ludwig, 21 Minn. 202 ; State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , ( 13 N. W. Rep.
State ex rel. Erickson v. West 43 N.W. 845 Minn. 1889
State ex rel. Erickson v. West 43 N.W. 845 Minn. 1889
In State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , ( 13 N. W. Rep.
City of Mankato v. Arnold 30 N.W. 305 Minn. 1886
City of Mankato v. Arnold 30 N.W. 305 Minn. 1886
This distinction was noticed in State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445, 459 , ( 13 N. W. Rep.