State v. Marquardsen
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Canyon County. The attempt to imply guilt because Branthover saw heads in the open cellar upon a certain occasion will hardly be seriously considered here. This case is parallel in every material respect with the case of State v. Seymour, ante, p: 357, 61 Pac. 1033. There is absolutely no evidence to sustain the verdict, and it must be presumed to have been rendered under the-influence of passion and prejudice and should be set aside.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Canyon County. The attempt to imply guilt because Branthover saw heads in the open cellar upon a certain occasion will hardly be seriously considered here. This case is parallel in every material respect with the case of State v. Seymour, ante, p: 357, 61 Pac. 1033. There is absolutely no evidence to sustain the verdict, and it must be presumed to have been rendered under the-influence of passion and prejudice and should be set aside. (State v. Nesbit, 4 Idaho, 548, 43 Pac. 66; State v. Grump, 5 Idaho; 366, 47 Pae. 814; State v. Mason, 4 Idaho, 543, 43 Pac. 63.)…
1Opinion of the CourtHuston, C. J.
The defendant was convicted of the crime of grand larceny in the alleged stealing of five head of cattle. The only evidence against the defendant is the finding in his possession of the hides of some of the alleged stolen cattle. Against this evidence defendant alleges that he bought said cattle, giving the time and circumstances under which the purchase was made. Earl McCullough, a witness for the defense, testified as follows: “My name is Earl McCullough, and I live at Falk’s Store. I am a fruit and stock raiser. My age is twenty years. I am acquainted with defendant, and know where his…
2Cited by8 opinions
- State v. DavisIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
- State v. SanfordIdaho Supreme Court · 1902
- State v. BatesIdaho Supreme Court · 1941
- State v. GurrUtah Supreme Court · 1911
- State v. SeymourIdaho Supreme Court · 1905
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.