Legal Opinion

Sutton v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 7, 1924PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Smith,.J.

Appellant was indicted for .seduction, was convicted, and has appealed.

His first assignment of error is that the court refused to give an instruction numbered 3 which he requested. But it does not appear from the bill of exceptions that this instruction was asked. The same thing is true of an instruction numbered 6, which appellant sets out in his motion for a new trial, but which does not appear, from the bill of exceptions, to have been asked.- The failure to give these instructions is therefore not before us for our review. Adkisson v. State, 142 Ark. 15.

The name of the woman…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Polk v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1883
  2. Bennett v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
  3. Caldwell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
  4. Rucker v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
  5. Wilhite v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Taylor v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  2. Threadgill v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
  3. Lovett v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API