Legal Opinion

State v. Snell

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided June 12, 1964No. 35680PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBoslaugh, J.

The defendant, Ray W. Snell, was convicted of leaving the scene of a personal injury accident in violation of section 39-762, R. R. S. 1943. His motion for new trial was overruled and he has appealed.

The defendant assigns as error the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction, the failure to grant a mistrial for misconduct of the county attorney, the admission of certain evidence, the failure to give instructions requested by the defendant, and the giving of certain instructions by the trial court upon its own motion.

Section 39-762, R. R. S. 1943, provides as follows: “The…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Carnley v. CochranSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. White v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Scott v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1921
  4. People v. RalloCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  5. Olson v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. State v. MinkelSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1975
  2. State v. EtchisonNebraska Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Commonwealth v. KauffmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. State v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
  5. State v. TennantWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1984

21 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