Legal Opinion

Chandler v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 11, 1943No. 4277PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.

Appellant was 'convicted for violating § 3398 of Pope’s Digest which is part of the statute commonly referred to as the Pandering Act, and from the sentence to a term in the penitentiary upon that conviction is this appeal.

For the reversal of this judgment it is insisted that the testimony is insufficient to support the verdict and that error was committed in refusing to give certain requested instructions and that incompetent testimony was admitted over appellant’s objections. These assignments of error relate, of course, to matters occurring during the progress of the trial and can only be…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Boatright v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938
  2. Springfield v. FulkSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
  3. Austin v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. West v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1955
  2. Yarbrough v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
  3. French v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1943
  4. Fielder v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1943
  5. Bernard v. HowellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1973

5 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