State v. Davis
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Cassia County. In cases of circumstantial evidence the rule is, that not only must the proof be consistent with the prisoners guilt, but must be consistent with every other rational conclusion.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Cassia County. In cases of circumstantial evidence the rule is, that not only must the proof be consistent with the prisoners guilt, but must be consistent with every other rational conclusion. (People v. Strong, 30 Cal. 151; People v. Schuler, 28 Cal. 490; 1 Green-leaf on Evidence, 12th ed., sec. 34; 1 Starkie on Evidence, 181, 182.) Evidence of a prior crime can have no legitimate place in the investigation of the commission of a subsequent crime by the same person. (People v. Sharp, 107 N. Y. 427; 1 Am. St. Eep. 851, 14 N. E. Eep. 319.) In an indictment for…
1Opinion of the CourtQuarles, J.
— The appellant was, at the April term of the district court of the fourth judicial district, in and for Cassia county, tried upon the charge of murder, committed upon the person of one John C. Wilson, and convicted. Thereafter the appellant, whom we hereafter designate as the defendant, moved for a new trial, which was denied him. The defendant then took two appeals to this court — one from the judgment of conviction, and the other from the order denying him a new trial. These two appeals, by consent of both parties, were argued and submitted together, and we will consider both appeals…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. LarkinsIdaho Supreme Court · 1897
- State v. CrumpIdaho Supreme Court · 1897
- State v. MasonIdaho Supreme Court · 1895
3Cited by39 opinions
- Davis v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- State v. DrapeauIdaho Supreme Court · 1976
- State v. StevensIdaho Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. MarrenIdaho Supreme Court · 1910
- State v. WeiseIdaho Supreme Court · 1954
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.