Legal Opinion

State v. Daymus

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided April 25, 1963No. 1276PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STRUCKMEYER, Justice.

Gary Daymus, appellant herein, was convicted of drawing a check on insufficient funds in violation of A.R.S. § 13-316, and on appeal the conviction was affirmed. State v. Daymus, 90 Ariz. 294, 367 P.2d 647. He now appeals from an order denying a new trial for newly discovered evidence presented under Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 310, 17 A.R.S.

A new trial for newly discovered evidence is mandatory if its introduction at the trial would probably have changed the verdict and if the defendant could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered and produced the evidence…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. DaymusArizona Supreme Court · 1961
  2. People v. WilliamsIllinois Supreme Court · 1909
  3. The People v. OgbinIllinois Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Whitt v. FarleyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1955
  5. State v. LoveArizona Supreme Court · 1954

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. HirschNebraska Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State v. SimsArizona Supreme Court · 1965
  3. State v. SimsArizona Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Commonwealth v. DuestMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1991
  5. State v. SchantzArizona Supreme Court · 1967

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