State v. Hardy
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Latah County. Where the evidence to convict defendant upon trial for murder is circumstantial the evidence must be of a conclusive nature, and is insufficient unless they exclude every other supposition.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Latah County. Where the evidence to convict defendant upon trial for murder is circumstantial the evidence must be of a conclusive nature, and is insufficient unless they exclude every other supposition. (Casey v. State, 20 Neb. 138, 29 N. W. 273; Starkey on Evidence, 10th ed., 863; People v. Padilliac, 42 Cal. 540; People v. Phillips, 39 Cal. 333; Kaiser v. State, 35 Neb. 704,. 53 N. W. 610; Kennedy v. State, 31 Fla. 428, 12 South. 858; Dreessen v. State, 38 Neb. 375, 56 N. W. 1024.) The defendant having been indicted by the grand jury without Saving first had a…
1Opinion of the CourtHuston, J.
The defendant was convicted of murder in the second degree at the February term, 1895, of the district court of Latah county, by causing the death of one Henrietta Hardy, an adopted child of the defendant, of about the age of two years, by poison. The crime is alleged to have been committed on the tenth day of February, 1895. The indictment was found on the 14th of February, 1895. Defendant was not in custody until after the finding of the indictment. ■On the 16th of February, 1895, defendant’s counsel, upon defendant’s arraignment, moved the court to order the grand jury which had found the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. SchielerIdaho Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. PhinneyIdaho Supreme Court · 1907
- State v. GoodmillerIdaho Supreme Court · 1963
- People v. ReeseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- State v. McMahanIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
- State v. WilliamsIdaho Supreme Court · 1906
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.