Madsen v. State
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for Douglas county. Tried below before Davis, J.
1Opinion of the CourtNorval, C. J.
An indictment was returned to the district court of Douglas county, charging the plaintiff in error, as a member of the city council of the city of Omaha, with having solicited a bribe. A verdict of guilty was returned, wheretupon a motion for a new trial was filed, alleging:
1. The verdict was not sustained by the evidence.
2. The verdict is contrary to law.
*6323. Newly discovered evidence, material to the defendant,, which he could not with reasonable diligence have discovered and produced at the trial.
4. Surprise, which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against.
The motion for a new trial…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Glaze v. ParcelNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Lowe v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
- Haverly v. ElliottNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Scott v. ChopeNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
- Gill v. LydickNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Sweet v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1905
- Hameyer v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1947
- Moore v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1947
- Wright v. WrightNebraska Supreme Court · 1937
- Young v. KinneyNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.