Legal Opinion

State v. Hurd

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided April 7, 1897PublishedCited by 44 opinions

Appeal from Woodbury District Court. — Hon. F. R. Haynor, Judge. Indictment for incest. Verdict of guilty, and a judgment thereon, from which the defendant appealed.

1Opinion of the CourtGtRanoer, J.

*3931 *392I. The defendant moved to quash the indictment, for different reasons. It appears that there were before the grand jury certain pictures and letters that were not returned with'the indictment to the clerk, nor filed in his office, but were kept in the *393office of the county attorney, and it is thought that the indictment should be quashed for that reason. The letters and pictures are documentary, and, as evidence before the grand jury, it was not necessary to set them out or note them in the minutes of the evidence. State v. Mullenhoff, 74 Iowa, 271 (37 N. W. Rep. 329). It follows that such…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. People v. JennesMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
  2. State v. BriggsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
  3. State v. MarkinsIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
  4. State v. MunchrathSupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
  5. Long v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1877

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. State v. KingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
  2. Barker v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1918
  3. State v. BurrisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1924
  4. State v. RankinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1970
  5. State v. MarshallSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898

39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API