Legal Opinion

Messersmith v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided April 30, 1940No. 27,359PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFansler, J.

The appellant was convicted of driving an automobile while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

He has assigned error upon the overruling of his motion for a new trial.

He relies in his brief upon the contention that the evidence is not sufficient to sustain the conviction. In order to present any question concerning the sufficiency of the evidence, the bill of exceptions must contain all of the evidence. Section 9-2105, Burns’ 1933, §2317, Baldwin’s 1934; Sunderman v. State (1926), 197 Ind. 705, 151 N. E. 829; McMurran et al. v. Hannum (1916), 185 Ind. 326, 113 N. E. 238. The bill of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McMurban v. HannumIndiana Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Sunderman v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1926

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Pinkerton v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Calvert v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Harrison v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1973
  4. Hudson v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984
  5. Dunbar v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1974

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

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

Powered by the Exa API