Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Ahrens

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 31, 1927No. 26,405PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Dissent

The evidence as it shows in print is not convincing. The jury which heard it was satisfied. The trial judge who heard it and upon whom the responsibility rests in reviewing in the first instance its sufficiency to sustain the verdict, and who has the discretionary right and in some cases the duty of granting a new trial, is content that it stand. I dissent from the majority opinion.

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. AhrensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927