State v. Herdina
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The defendant and his sons, Frank and Adolph, and one Kroulik, were jointly indicted, in the district court for Steele county, for an assault, with dangerous weapons, upon one Barker, with intent to do him great bodily harm. The defendant requested and was granted a separate trial, which was had before Lord, J., and a jury, and resulted in a conviction.
Read the full summary
The defendant and his sons, Frank and Adolph, and one Kroulik, were jointly indicted, in the district court for Steele county, for an assault, with dangerous weapons, upon one Barker, with intent to do him great bodily harm. The defendant requested and was granted a separate trial, which was had before Lord, J., and a jury, and resulted in a conviction. A new trial was denied and sentence was passed, and the defendant appeals from the judgment and the order refusing a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtGiletllan, C. J.
There was certainly sufficient evidence to justify the jury in finding that the party with whom the defendant was acting committed an assault upon Barker, and that one of them, Adolph Herdina, was using, in the assault, a dangerous weapon, with intent to do great bodily harm to Barker. There is also evidence enough to justify the jury in finding that each of the persons participating in the assault, including this defendant, knew that Adolph was armed with and was using a dangerous weapon, with intent to do grea. bodily harm, and that, in assisting in the assault, they participated in and had…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Alexander v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Stabs v. City of TowerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
- State v. MickensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
- Frew v. TeagardenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1922