Minnesota Supreme Court, 1908

State v. Mattson

State v. Mattson
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided July 24, 1908 · Are
105 Minn. 164; 117 N.W. 503; 1908 Minn. LEXIS 491 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

John J. Schoregge, for appellant., B. T. Young, Attorney General, and Frank Murray, County Attorney, for the state.

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 1954, 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

State v. Mattson

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

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

JAGG ARE, J.

The defendant, arrested on a warrant issued by the municipal court of the city of Renville, was found guilty and fined. Thereafter defendant filed a bond and recognizance on appeal, with due notice of appeal. The district court granted a motion of the state to dismiss the appeal because of the insufficiency of the bond.

The bond was conditioned that if the defendant should personally appear and prosecute the appeal with effect at a named term of the district court, to answer said appeal, and in the meantime to keep the peace, and not to depart thence without leave duly granted, etc. This *165bond did not contain the requirement of section 4018, R. L. 1905, that the defendant abide the judgment of the court to which the appeal was taken. This defect was substantial and material.

The other questions raised on appeal were determined adversely to the defendant in State v. Mattson, supra, page 63, 117 N. W. 227.

Affirmed.

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