Legal Opinion
State v. Ross
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided January 21, 1998No. 96-1780PublishedCited by 46 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LAVORATO, Justice.
Adam Ross appeals from convictions and sentences for (1) conspiracy to commit theft by deception, (2) extortion, and (3) aiding, making, establishing, or advertising a lottery. See Iowa Code §§ 706.1, 714.1(3) (conspiracy to commit theft by deception), 711.4 (extortion), 725.12 (lottery) (1993). He seeks to have his sentences and convictions reversed because, as he contends, the district court erred by (1) refusing to instruct the jury that “materiality” is an element of theft by deception, (2) failing to give his theory of defense instruction on the elements of theft by…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- State v. MitchellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1997
- United States v. Riley S. Walls, Sr., United States of America, Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Karen M. Blakney, Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1996
- State v. KiddSupreme Court of Iowa · 1976
- State v. BlythSupreme Court of Iowa · 1975
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- State of Iowa v. Vernon Lee HuserSupreme Court of Iowa · 2017
- State v. DullardSupreme Court of Iowa · 2003
- State of Iowa v. Matthew Joseph ElliottSupreme Court of Iowa · 2011
- State v. TangieSupreme Court of Iowa · 2000
- State v. HallumSupreme Court of Iowa · 1998
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.