State v. Lawrence
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Defendant was indicted by the grand jury, tried in the district court for Lake county before Cant, J., and a jury, and convicted of grand larceny in the second degree. Defendant’s motion to acquit and discharge defendant or for a new trial was denied. From the order denying his motion, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Taylor, C.
The indictment charges that on May 1, 1909, at the city of Two Harbors in the county of Lake, defendant as the agent of Celia Barrett, had in his possession the sum of $500 in money, the property of said Celia Barrett, and with intent to deprive her of her said property, did then and there wrongfully and feloniously appropriate the same to his own use. The trial resulted in a verdict of guilty. Thereafter defendant made a motion for an order of acquittal and discharge, and, in case that should be denied, for an order setting- aside the verdict and granting a new trial. Both motions…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Burchard v. HullSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- St. Paul National Bank v. CannonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Trull v. HammondSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Smith v. FletcherSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- Budd v. BroenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Johnson v. HoweSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
- Lynn v. Northern Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
- Dehnhoff v. HeinenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
- Farnham v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
- State v. McCulloughSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923