Legal Opinion

State v. Kilcoyne

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 7, 1926PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeaslee, C. J.

The requested instructions each related to a fact which was not a necessary part of the state’s case. Those facts were merely surrounding circumstances, each of which had a tendency to show the defendant’s guilt. But without reference to any of them there was abundant evidence upon which to find the defendant guilty. In this state of the proof, it manifestly would have been error to charge that the state’s failure to prove these material but non-essential facts would entitle the defendant to an acquittal. The requests were properly denied.

If the requests were also to be treated as seeking a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Holt v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  2. Coffin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  3. Agnew v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  4. State v. SmithSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1851

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. BlakeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1973
  2. State v. BarrySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1943
  3. State v. HaleSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
  4. Heffenger v. HeffengerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API