State v. Thatcher
Utah Supreme Court
1Dissent
I dissent. In the first place, to my mind the statement with respect to the facts does not fairly reflect the record. In the second place, the opinion is founded on a wrong concept as to the legal principles governing the approach to the problem before us. Thirdly, the facts set forth in the record do not show any criminal negligence. Fourthly, the record indicates that the accident was not the result of any negligent act of defendant, but the result of the acts of other parties. I shall outline under these four points, the places wherein I think the prevailing opinion is in error.
First: The…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- State v. McMahanIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
- Schultz v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1911
- State v. LingmanUtah Supreme Court · 1939
- People v. FrahmCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- People v. DriggsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.