Buckley v. State

The defendant in the district court for Douglas county was convicted of the crime of robbery as defined in sec-ion 13 of the criminal code. He complains of two principal matters in which he contends that the judgment of the trial *87court was erroneous. First: That the verdict against him is not supported by the evidence; and, second, that his jranishment is excessive.

1. The first contention is based mainly upon the lack of evidence, as he thinks, to identify him as the person who committed the crime. On the evening of Noveiivber 9, 1905, Mr. Healey was alone in his saloon in South Omaha, when…