Legal Opinion

Brock v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 31, 1926PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.

Pete Brock prosecutes' this appeal to reverse a judgment of conviction against him for the crime of grand larceny and burglary.

The first assignment of error is that the evidence is not legally sufficient to sustain the verdict.

McKinley Pitts, an accomplice of the defendant, was a witne'ss for the State. According to his testimony, Pete Brock, Lewis Stewart, Fred Stewart, and himself stole 900 pounds of seed-cotton and sold it for $27, and divided the proceeds of .the sale.

It is contended by counsel for the defendant that the testimony of Pitts is not sufficiently corroborated to warrant the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Bruder v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
  2. Middleton v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
  3. Elder v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1901
  4. Gill v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
  5. Brewer v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
  2. Atwood v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
  3. Carlley v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API