Legal Opinion
Ramer v. State
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided October 1, 1968No. State 1, 2PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, C. J.
The defendant raises several errors occurring during the trial which will be discussed seri-atim.
Sequestering of Minor Witnesses.
During the trial the court refused to separate the minor witnesses from each other while testifying and this ruling is claimed by the defendant to be error. It has long been the majority rule in this country and the specific rule in Wisconsin following the early English rule that the exclusion, separation, sequestration of wit nesses or “putting witnesses under the rule” is not a matter of right but lies in the legal discretion of the trial court. Annot. 32 A. L. R.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Snyder v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Giles v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- State v. MillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Rausch v. BuisseWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- Loose v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- James Small, Jr. v. Superintendent Jeff Endicott and Kenosha County Circuit Court, 1Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
- Wold v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Commonwealth v. CainSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Wilson v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Brown v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.