State v. Hochman
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtSteinle, J.
There is sharp conflict as to material particulars in the evidence adduced by the state and that presented on behalf of the defendant. The weight and credibility of the evidence were for the court to determine. Of record there is evidence which the court was entitled to deem credible to the effect that the defendant owned and operated a retail novelty shop in Milwaukee; that Police Officer James Psar-ros, while on police duty and in plain clothes, visited the defendant’s store on five occasions between January or February, 1955, and April, 1955, with a view of attempting to purchase some…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Olmstead v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Sorrells v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- State v. WarfieldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
- Topolewski v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1906
- State v. MarquardtSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- State v. AmundsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- State v. DolceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964
- State v. BrownWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. MonsoorWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- State v. BjerkaasCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1991
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.