Legal Opinion

Village of Bayside v. Bruner

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 31, 1967PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.

In general, the appellant contends that conviction for drunken driving, even though charged under a village ordinance, carries with it such opprobrium that the defendant should be entitled to the protection afforded in a criminal trial. Specifically, he contends that the jury should have been instructed that guilt could only be established by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant could not be called adversely by the village attorney, and that the jury should have been instructed that a unanimous verdict was required rather than the five-sixths verdict used in civil cases.

We need…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. City of Madison v. GeierWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  3. City of Neenah v. AlsteenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
  4. City of Milwaukee v. BurnsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  5. City of Milwaukee v. WukyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. AlbrightCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1980
  2. State v. PetersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
  3. State Ex Rel. Prentice v. County Court of Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
  4. State v. KramsvogelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Town of Geneva v. TillsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1986

6 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