State v. Parrant
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This is an appeal from an order of the district court for Wright county, denying a motion for a new trial. The case is fully stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
*179 By the Court
Ripley, Ch. J.
The defendant was convicted at the June term, 1869, of murder in the first degree of a child of which Mary Parrant, his .wife, was delivered on the 9th of May, and which came to its death on the evening of the same day.
A motion was made for a new trial on the following grounds:
1. Irregularity in allowing the jury to separate and go at large during the trial.
2. Misconduct of James Finnegan, one of the jurors.
3. That the verdict is not justified by the evidence, and is contrary to law.
4. Errors in law occurring at the trial, and excepted to.
The motion was denied. As…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. RyanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1868
- Bilansky v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1859
- Daniels v. . LyonNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. RobinsonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1882
- State v. MadiganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
- State v. ChurchSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1895
- State v. MunceyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1926
- Evans v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.