Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Ohler

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided April 9, 1965No. 35874Published

1DissentSpencer, J.

I dissent from the majority opinion because I believe while it gives. lip> service to it, it fails to apply the well-established law of this jurisdiction.

The only question presented by this appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence, which is wholly circumstantial, to sustain a conviction. The sufficiency of this, evidence must be established in the light of well-established rules of law. See Kitts v. State, 153 Neb. 784, 46 N. W. 2d 158. In that case we said: “The test by which to- determine the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence in a criminal prosecution is whether the facts and…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Morgan v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Reyes v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Hiner v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Jeppesen v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Kitts v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1951

12 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