State v. Matkins
Montana Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Rosebud County; Sydney Fox, Judge. James Matkins and Claude Gatliff were convicted of grand larceny, and appeal. submitted a brief. We submit that the newly discovered evidence is not cumulative and that the court in deciding the motion was mistaken in the law when it says that it is.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Rosebud County; Sydney Fox, Judge. James Matkins and Claude Gatliff were convicted of grand larceny, and appeal. submitted a brief. We submit that the newly discovered evidence is not cumulative and that the court in deciding the motion was mistaken in the law when it says that it is. In Winfield Building & Loan Assn. v. McMullen, 59 Kan. 493, 53 Pac. 481, the court said: “The fact that the testimony may tend to prove the same issue upon which proof was offered at-the trial is not enough to make it cumulative, and whether or not it is cumulative is to be determined…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Brantlt
The defendants, charged jointly with grand larceny, were convicted and sentenced to terms in the state prison at hard labor — Matkins to a term of four years, and Gatliff to a term of five years. They moved for a new trial, on the ground, among others, of newly discovered material evidence which they could not with reasonable diligence have discovered and introduced at the trial. They have appealed from the judgment and from an order denying their motion. The only question submitted for decision is whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a new trial.
The larceny charged was…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Berry v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1851
- Scheuer v. StateMontana Supreme Court · 1904
- Territory of Montana v. ClaytonMontana Supreme Court · 1888
- Leyson v. DavisMontana Supreme Court · 1895
- Garfield M. & M. Co. v. HammerMontana Supreme Court · 1886
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- State v. GreenoMontana Supreme Court · 1959
- Fusselman v. Yellowstone Valley Land & Irrigation Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1917
- State v. HarkinsMontana Supreme Court · 1929
- Ebaugh v. BurnsMontana Supreme Court · 1922
- Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co. v. WarrickSupreme Court of Delaware · 1938
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.