Lingquist v. State
Indiana Supreme Court
Prom the Huntington Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtMonks, J.
Appellant was charged by affidavit and information with the crime of rape upon the person of a female child under the age of fourteen years. A motion to *543quash the affidavit and information was overruled. On trial by a jury he was found guilty as charged, and over a motion for a new trial, and a motion in arrest of judgment, judgment was rendered against him on the verdict.
The errors assigned call in question the action of the court in overruling the motion to quash the affidavit and information, the motion for a new trial, and the motion in arrest.
Appellant’s contention is that the act of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Staser v. HoganIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Siberry v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
- Grubb v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Reed v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1895
- Shoemaker v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. HadleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1907
- Blume v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1900
- Mankin v. Pennsylvania Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1903
- Lake Erie & Western Railroad v. HuffmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1912
- Hendershot v. State ex rel. BennettIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.