Legal Opinion

State v. Shear

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 2, 1881PublishedCited by 11 opinions

REPORTED from the Circuit Court for Sauk County.

1Opinion of the CourtOetost, J.

This is an information in the usual form, charging the defendant with having committed the crime of rape upon the person of “ Mary Conant, a female of the age of ten years or more. ” The learned circuit judge charged the jury as follows: “If you do not find the defendant guilty of the crime of rape, and find that he had sexual connection with Mary Conant, the complaining witness, at the time and place named in the information, you may and should find him guilty of fornication.” The jury found the defendant not guilty of the crime of rape, but guilty of the offense of fornication. The learned…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. MartinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Kilkelly v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
  3. State v. HillWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
  4. State v. ThomasSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
  5. Traylor v. HorrallIndiana Supreme Court · 1837

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Porath v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Vogel v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Eastway v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Martin v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Laev v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913

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

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

Powered by the Exa API