State v. Crosby

4 Citing cases

  1. Crosby v. Ellsworth

    431 F.2d 35 (9th Cir. 1970)   Cited 2 times

    His conviction was upheld by the Supreme Court of Montana. State v. Crosby, 148 Mont. 307, 420 P.2d 431 (1966). Although Crosby has completed service of his sentence pending the appeal herein, this does not moot the federal habeas proceeding.

  2. Brown v. Sojourner (In re Estate of Brown)

    430 S.C. 474 (S.C. 2020)   Cited 7 times

    Moreover, it is possible that a party could falsely claim (or mistakenly believe) that a marriage is bigamous, so requiring this point to be established in a formal setting with admissible evidence provides a verifiable method for ascertaining the parties' marital status. Cf.Perlstein v. Perlstein , 152 Conn. 152, 204 A.2d 909, 911–12 (1964) (stating a marriage ceremony gives rise to a presumptively valid status of marriage that persists unless and until it is overthrown by evidence in an appropriate judicial proceeding; the court stated "[n]o mere claim of bigamy, whether made in a pleading or elsewhere, would establish that a marriage was bigamous," and "[t]he state's concern in the marriage status of its domiciliaries imperatively demands that the invalidity of the purported marriage be judicially determined before that invalidity be accepted"); State v. Crosby , 148 Mont. 307, 420 P.2d 431, 433 (Mont. 1966) (reasoning that, where a statute proclaims the methods to avoid a subsequent marriage from being declared bigamous, one of which being that the marriage has been declared void by a court of competent jurisdiction, "such a determination of voidness cannot be made by the person involved"; rather, it must be made by a court of competent jurisdiction). Section 20-1-80, a civil statute, is distinguishable from the criminal offense of bigamy, currently found in section 16-15-10 of the South Carolina Code.

  3. Crosby v. St. Brd. of Pardons

    456 P.2d 845 (Mont. 1969)

    This action was instituted by Crosby, appearing pro se, upon a petition to the district court. An alternative writ of mandate issued, show cause hearing was held, and the order from which the appeal was taken was entered on December 19, 1968. Crosby was confined by reason of his conviction on two counts of bigamy and sentence of two consecutive two year terms. His conviction was upheld on appeal. See State v. Crosby, 148 Mont. 307, 420 P.2d 431. Following confinement in the prison Crosby was paroled from the first sentence effective May 1, 1967, to begin serving time on the second consecutive sentence.

  4. Petition of Crosby

    440 P.2d 770 (Mont. 1968)   Cited 1 times

    PER CURIAM: Roy G. Crosby, Jr., an inmate of the Montana State Prison, forwarded to this Court a letter dated April 25, 1968, in which he argues with this Court as to its interpretation of the Montana statutory law discussed in our opinion rendered on November 14, 1966, in the case of State of Montana v. Crosby, appearing in 148 Mont. 307, 420 P.2d 431. Petition for rehearing therein denied December 15, 1966. The matters referred to in the letter were formally presented to this Court by Crosby's counsel upon his appeal and our determination thereof is set forth in our opinion.