Legal Opinion

State v. Kuenzli

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 20, 1932PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed April 5, 1932:

Wickhem, J.

The principal contention of the defendant is that the first verdict of the jury amounted to a verdict of acquittal, for the reason that the verdict negatived the felonious intent essential to sustain a conviction for embezzlement.

If the verdict as rendered is clearly one of “not guilty,” the court could not decline to receive it. State v. Arrington, 3 Murph. (7 N. C.) 571; State v. Ostrander, 30 Mo. 13; Goolsby v. State (Miss.) 35 South. 212; Register v. State, 10 Ga. App. 623, 74 S. E. 429. On the other hand, if the verdict is so…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. People v. Lee Yune ChongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Gaines v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1906
  3. Register v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
  4. State v. Godwin.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  5. Allen v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Heinze v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1945
  2. Banovitch v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1954
  3. Stuebgen v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1976
  4. State v. CarlsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
  5. State v. WitteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1943

15 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