Howard v. State
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Hamilton Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtPettit, C. J.
Indictment for grand larceny of a horse, buggy, and harness. A jury found the defendant guilty, and, over a motion for a new trial, judgment was rendered on the verdict.
*191One of the reasons for a new trial was, that the verdict of the jury is not sustained by sufficient evidence. The bill of -exceptions clearly shows that all the evidence is not in the record. It shows that a number' of different papers were read to the jury, but they are not copied into the transcript, and their place is occupied with “(here insert).” We cannot, therefore, consider any question as to the sufficiency of the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Clem v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- Bradley v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1869
- Hall v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1858
- Engleman v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1850
- Binns v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Glover v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
- Parker v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
- State v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- McAnally v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Hudelson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.