Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

115 F.2d 217

Docket Nos. 11705, 11707.

Hinkle v. United States

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Oct 25, 1940.

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1940-10-25

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently June 1959

1 state decisions

2 counsel of record

Relies on Hastings v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1940-10-25

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Jim Barnett, of Oklahoma City, Okl.-, and John W. Tyree, of Lawton, Okl., for appellants.

¶2Clinton R. Barry, U. S. Atty., of Fort Smith, Ark. (Duke Frederick and John E. Harris, Asst. U. S. Attys., both of Fort Smith, Ark., on the brief), for appellee.

¶3Before SANBORN and THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and DEWEY, District Judge.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5These are appeals from convictions under an indictment charging conspiracy to violate and for violation of section 223, Title 27 U.S.C.A., by transporting intoxicating liquors from the state of Arkansas into the state of Oklahoma. The contentions are that the statute of Oklahoma of 1939, 37 Okl.St.Ann. §§ 41^18, inclusive, is violative of the Constitution of Oklahoma, and that conceding its validity arguendo it does not bring the state of Oklahoma under the protection of the provisions of section 223, supra, of the federal statute.

¶6The issues thus presented are controlled by the decision of this court in Hastings v. United States, 8 Cir., 115 F.2d 216, this day decided. On the authority of that decision, the judgments appealed from are affirmed.

/115/f2d/217 · .json · Public domain