Legal Opinion

State v. Strum

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided November 22, 1918PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Appeal from Black Hawk District Court. — C. W. Mullan, Judge. Appeal from a conviction for receiving stolen property.

1Opinion of the CourtSalinger, J.

1. Appeal and error: absence of brief point. 2. Larceny: value in absence of market. I. Whatever effect upon the right to review the presence or absence of an adequate point, under the caption “Errors Relied .Upon for Reversal,” may have, it is thoroughly well settled that nothing will be reviewed which is not included in some “brief point.” Under this limitation, the only question we have as to the propriety of receiving testimony on the value of the things stolen is raised by Brief Point 1, which, in effect, complains that ihe State made no attempt to prove the actual value, on the theory…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. State v. VanceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
  2. McMahon v. City of DubuqueSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
  3. State v. PeirceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
  4. State v. HathawaySupreme Court of Iowa · 1896
  5. Sorenson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1909

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Mellor v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1947
  2. State v. BrightmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1961
  3. State v. KappenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1920
  4. State v. GriffinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1934
  5. State v. RegisterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1962

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

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

Powered by the Exa API