Legal Opinion

Siegel v. State

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 4, 1930PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFritz, J.

The only alleged error which the plaintiff in error is entitled to have reviewed at this time is in relation to the form of the verdict which was submitted to the jury. Upon the close of the testimony the court submitted that .form to the attorneys for all parties. It began as follows:

“We, the jury in the above entitled action, for our verdict herein find as follows:
“As to the first count in the information charging the *14defendants with having received and concealed stolen property, to' wit, the automobile of J. H. Weyher, as follows:
“The defendant, Guy R. Siegel,-guilty.
“The defendant, E. H.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. French v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
  2. State ex rel. Zabel v. Municipal Court of Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
  3. George C. Peterson Co. v. County of IowaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
  4. State ex rel. Traister v. MahoneyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Hayes v. StatesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  2. In re LeviCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  3. State v. PrihodaWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Estremera Mercado v. JonesSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1952
  5. State v. WagnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942

3 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