State v. Serkau
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.
The assignment that the court erred in finding the defendant guilty of the crime charged upon all of the evidence makes it unnecessary to consider the detailed changes requested in the finding. State v. MacCullough, 115 Conn. 306, 307, 161 Atl. 512. The basic questions raised are whether the court had jurisdiction and whether, on all the evidence, the accused was guilty as charged. The court could reasonably have found the following facts: Mrs. Maud P. Cahill was a widow about sixty-five years of age, without business experience, and lived alone in Stamford. She owned American Telephone &…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State v. HayesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1941
- Rindge v. HolbrookSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Commonwealth v. BarryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- People v. GordonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- People v. CraneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- State v. RossSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- State v. PundySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
- State v. VarsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1966
- State v. FoordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1955
- Watson v. HowardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.