Legal Opinion

State v. Sutkus

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided December 7, 1935PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHudson, J.

On exceptions. The respondent stands jury-convicted of an assault and battery with intent to kill and slay while armed with a dangerous weapon. The presiding Justice denied his motion for a new trial, to which exception was taken. Instead, his remedy was to appeal. R. S. 1930, Chap. 146, Sec. 27; State v. O’Donnell, et als., 131 Me., 294, 161 A., 802; State v. Dodge, 124 Me., 243, 127 A., 899. Without particular comment, however, it may be stated that, although the ruling on the motion is not properly before us, we have carefully examined the evidence and found it sufficient to warrant the…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. State v. MoodyWashington Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Dunn v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1898
  3. State v. LowryWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. State v. DodgeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1925
  5. Rawson v. CurtissIllinois Supreme Court · 1858

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. FernaldSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1968
  2. State v. BeySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1965
  3. Sard v. SardSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1951
  4. State v. HebertSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1983
  5. J. W. Stephens, Ltd. v. Maine Lumber Products Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1951

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API