Faull v. State
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtOwen, J.
The defendant contends that the two counts were improperly joined. Sub. (27), sec. 1, of ch. 441 of the Laws of 1921, under which defendant was prosecuted, specifically provides that
“In any affidavit, complaint, information, or indictment for the violation of this chapter, separate offenses may be united in separate counts and the defendant may be tried on all at one trial and the penalty for all offenses may be imposed,”
*69If there were any doubt as to whether two or more misdemeanors growing out of distinct and separate transactions could be joined in one information independent of statutory…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Boldt v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
- Commonwealth v. HarringtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Porath v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895
- State v. LeichamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
- Fossdahl v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Dye v. SkeenWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1950
- Curtis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
- State v. ConleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1974
- State v. BanksWisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
- State v. EllisNebraska Supreme Court · 1983
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.