Legal Opinion

Nail v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided December 17, 1925No. A-5186PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdwards, J.

For convenience and brevity the plaintiff in error will be referred to as defendant.

The defendant argues the following contentions as ground for reversal: First. Error of the court in refusing to give requested instructions and in the giving of erroneous instructions. Second. Error in the admission of evidence on the part of the state. Third. The insufficiency of the evidence. These assignments will be considered in the order presented.

This prosecution arose on account of the death of John Falcone, caused by his being struck by an automobile driven by defendant. The facts, briefly stated, are…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. CampbellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1910
  2. Holmes v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1911
  3. The People v. . BuddensieckNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
  4. Ford v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1912
  5. Kent v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1912

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Freeman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1984
  2. Lowrey v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1948
  3. Mayse v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1927
  4. State v. TjadenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Ball v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 2007

31 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