State v. Dingman
Idaho Supreme Court
1Concurrence
BUDGE, G. J.,
Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part. — I concur in that part of the opinion written by Justice William A. Lee and concurred in by the majority of the court, upholding the constitutionality of the law under which this prosecution was had, and also in sustaining the sufficiency of the information, but I am entirely out of accord with that portion of the opinion reversing the judgment upon the ground that the trial court erred in admitting what is denominated in the majority opinion as “hearsay testimony. ’ ’
First briefly calling attention to what is denominated hearsay…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Spies v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
- Branch v. FaustIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- People v. RoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Knight v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
- State v. MoilenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.