Legal Opinion

State v. Barnard

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 1, 1929No. 27,029PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Olsen, C.

Defendant was convicted of forgery in the second degree and appeals from the judgment of conviction.

It is urged that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction. That a series of nine or more checks, purporting to be made by H. M. Noack & Sons, at Morton, Minnesota, were forged and negotiated in Brown and neighboring counties in this state, is undisputed. Most of the checks were uttered and negotiated during the period from March 8 to March 12, 1928. The charge is that this defendant uttered and disposed of one of the checks at New Ulm, Minnesota, on March 12.

Defendant and…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
  2. State v. LeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1876
  3. State v. CrawfordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
  4. State v. DolliverSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
  5. State v. MorrisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Simon v. CarrollSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  2. State v. TaylorArizona Supreme Court · 1965
  3. State v. PalmerstenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API