Varga v. State
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtOwen, J.
The plaintiff in error, hereinafter called the defendant, assigns no procedural errors, nor errors in con*580nection with the submission of the case to the jury. The errors assigned all go to the point that the evidence does not support the verdict.
The evidence on the part of the State consists of the testimony of George Bruckner, the offended though not the complaining witness, who testified to facts constituting the offense. His testimony finds some corroboration in the proved penchant of the defendant, who was forty-three years of age, for the society of young boys. The defendant denied the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. HintzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
- McLain v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
- Abaly v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1916
- O'Keefe v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
- Skulhus v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Sparkman v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Gregoire v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1957
- State v. BakerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- State v. PerlinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- State v. YanceyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.