Smith v. State

Stoy Smith was convicted of statutory rape and prosecuted proceedings in error to this court.

It is alleged that the refusal of the trial court to grant a continuance was error. The identical question was discussed in Cooper v. State, 120 Neb. 598, and many previous cases examined. Again, in Smith v. State, 123 Neb. 17, the rules relating to continuances in criminal cases were reexamined. These cases are controlling in the instant case. The defendant, plaintiff in error here, was arrested November 25, 1933, and was charged with committing the crime October 11, 1933. The preliminary examination…