Legal Opinion

Gray v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 26, 1957No. 0-498PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Petitioner herein has attempted pro se to perfect an appeal to this court under Rule 2-40. The papers which he has filed contain no proper assignment of error, nor do they contain any of the record necessary to present the questions which *702petitioner is apparently attempting to raise, nor does it in any manner comply with the provisions of Rule 2-40.

The petition is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on this court under Rule 2-40, and for this reason it should be dismissed. Davis v. Pelley (1952), 230 Ind. 248, 251, 102 N. E. 2d 910; Bolden v. State (1955), 234 Ind. 708, 130 N. E. 2d 52.

Petitio…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Davis v. PelleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Bolden v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1955
  3. State ex rel. Griffith v. NicholsIndiana Supreme Court · 1957

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State ex rel. Griffith v. NicholsIndiana Supreme Court · 1957

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API