Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Attorney(S) David Cross and Harry E. Loveren, for the defendant. James P. Tuttle, solicitor, for the state. Judges Per Curiam.[fn*] [fn*] See foot-note on page 80. See more information ... Smart Summary Please sign up to generate summary. STATE v. COLLINS. When it is uncertain whether a state statute is in violation of the federal constitution, a criminal prosecution thereunder will ordinarily be sustained in order that the question may be decided by the federal court. Per Curiam.[fn*] [fn*] See foot-note on page 80. The need of a uniform operation of federal law in all the states, and the apparent degree of uncertainty as to the view the federal court may take of the statute upon which the prosecution is based (Leisy v. Hardin, 135 U.S. 100, Bowman v. Railway, 125 U.S. 490, In re Worthen, 58 Fed. Rep. 467, State v. Marshall, 64 N.H. 549, 551, Powell v. Pennsylvania, 127 U.S. 678, 685, Boston Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U.S. 25), are reasons for a disposition of the case that will furnish an opportunity to obtain a determination of the question by the federal court, by which alone it can be finally settled. Exception overruled. CHASE, J., did not sit: the others concurred.