Legal Opinion

State v. Hoy

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 24, 1901No. Nos. 12,544 — (10)PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Cant, J., denying a motion for a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

Appellant was convicted in the district court of St. Louis county of the crime of grand larceny in the first degree, and appeals from the judgment rendered against him.

There is but one question in the case, and that is presented by an exception to the charge of the trial judge to the jury. In speaking on the subject of the credit to be given to several witnesses, the court charged the jury as follows:

“You will not allow yourselves to be imposed upon, nor led into the belief of unreasonable stories on the part of either the prosecution or of the defense. You must bear in mind the tendency on…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Harriott v. HolmesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. AmesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
  2. State v. YatesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  3. State v. ShetskySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
  4. State v. AlmosSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
  5. State v. DallasSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920

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

Powered by the Exa API