Legal Opinion

State v. Husman

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1939No. File No. 8203PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRudolph, J.

The defendant, Fred Husman, was convicted of rape in the first degree and has appealed to this court. The sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction is not questioned by anyone except the author of the dissenting opinion. Appellant states in his brief, “That there is evidence sufficient to justify the verdict of the jury, if believed, is conceded.” Appellant has set forth forty-seven different assignments of error, many of which relate to objections to testimony. Only those assignments of error of sufficient importance to warrant discussion will be referred to in this opinion.

The…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Crumpton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Behseleck v. AndrusSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1932
  3. State v. KnudsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1911
  4. State v. ChristiansenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922
  5. State v. MeserveySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. State v. KindvallSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1971
  2. State v. NelsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1964
  3. State v. LufkinsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981
  4. State v. NormanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1948
  5. State v. KingstonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1970

10 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