State v. Simmering
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
UDALL, Justice.
Defendant was charged with forgery on or about the 10th day of August, 1959. Her chief defense was alibi. The jury returned a verdict of guilty. On appeal defendant’s sole assignment of error is the giving of a certain instruction hereinafter referred to. For the reasons given hereinafter, we conclude there was no prejudicial error and that the conviction must therefore be affirmed.
Although the allegation of the information was that the crime was committed “on or about” the 10th day of August, all the state’s proof shows that it was in fact the 10th day of August between 2:00-…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kinsey v. State of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court · 1937
- State v. VallejosArizona Supreme Court · 1960
- Singh v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1929
- State v. SorrellArizona Supreme Court · 1959
- Hash v. State of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court · 1936
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. DavisArizona Supreme Court · 2003
- State v. BoagArizona Supreme Court · 1969
- Commonwealth v. BoyerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
- State v. RackleyArizona Supreme Court · 1970
- State v. SianezArizona Supreme Court · 1968
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.