Legal Opinion

Fisher v. State

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided March 11, 1955PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett

This is an appeal on the technical record from- a conviction for a crime against nature. Code, Section 11184. There appears to be no error in the technical record. Upon an examination of the record we fonnd that the plaintiff in error had no counsel and it was thus that the court appointed Mr. Roy Stansberry to represent him. The only insistence made is that the offense as described in the indictment is not within the contemplation of the Statute which is:

“Crimes against nature. — .Crimes against nature, either with mankind or any beast, are punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary not…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Honselman v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Phoenix Cotton Oil Co. v. Royal Indemnity Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1918
  3. State v. AltwatterIdaho Supreme Court · 1916
  4. State v. WhitmarshSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Means v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Rose v. LockeSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Sherrill v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1959
  3. State v. WilkinsTennessee Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Cook v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1973
  5. Evans v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1978

17 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