Legal Opinion
State v. Boggs
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided October 20, 1917PublishedCited by 15 opinions
Appeal from Wapello District Court. — D. M. Anderson, Judge. Dependant, who was indicted under the provisions of Section 4823 of the Supplement to the Code, 1913, was tried and acquitted by the jury. An instruction requested by the State was refused, and exception taken. The State appeals. The material facts are stated in the opinion.
1Per curiam
Malicious mischiei? : ■ evidence: operation of automobile: consent of owner: effect. The indictment in this case is based upon Section 4823 of the Supplement to the Code, 1913, the material part of which is as follows:
“ * * * or if any chauffeur or other person shall without the consent of the owner take, or cause to be taken, any automobile or motor vehicle, and operate or drive or cause the same to be operated or driven, he shall be imprisoned * * *.”
At the close of the testimony, counsel for the State’ requested the court to give the following instruction:
“* * * that consent given by the…
2Cited by15 opinions
- State v. SchminkeySupreme Court of Iowa · 1999
- Drewek v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Hill v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
- In Re ConnellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- State v. ClarkWashington Supreme Court · 1982
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.