Legal Opinion

State v. Nelson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 12, 1926No. 25,398PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDibble, J.

The defendant was charged by information with grand larceny in the first degree. He was convicted of pettit larceny. He appeals from the order denying his motion for a new trial.

The evidence by which it was sought to connect the defendant with the crime charged was circumstantial. No one claims that it was at all conclusive. It tod some weak points. We are not now quarreling with the verdict. The only question which we discuss is the exclusion, upon the objection of the county attorney, of character evidence offered by the defendant.

Our constant holding, in harmony with that of other courts,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. SauerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
  2. State v. HutchisonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
  3. State v. DolliverSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
  4. State v. MorrisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. TuomiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
  2. Bank of Dassel v. MarchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  3. State v. CavettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  4. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. LevorsenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1943
  5. State v. BarnardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929

2 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