Minnesota Supreme Court, 1877

State v. Miller

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided February 8, 1877 · Cornell

23 Minn. 352; 1877 Minn. LEXIS 25 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

Leo Miller, appellant, submitted a printed argument, advocating, at great length, the right of himself and Miss Strickland to make and perform the contract above recited., Oeo. P. Wilson, Attorney General, for the State, submitted the case without argument.

Can I rely on this case?

Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.

(as of 9/30/2026)

Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1952, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

State v. Shannon (Minn. 1952)
State v. Swan (Minn. 1922)
State v. Wyman (Minn. 1889)
Territory v. O'Donnell (N.M. 1887)
State v. Johnson (Minn. 1884)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Cornell, J.

The question sought to be presented and argued by defendant is not properly before us for consideration. The return to the appeal contains no exceptions taken to “any opinion, direction, or judgment” of the court below, and settled, allowed, and made a part of the judgment roll, as prescribed by Gen. St. c. 117, § 6. Hence, the only question which can be considered upon the record before us is as to the sufficiency of the indictment to support the judgment. As appellant- makes no question of this character, and none is apparent to the court, the judgment is affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.