Aller v. State

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Aller v. State

212 N.W.2d 702, 61 Wis. 2d 740, 1973 Wisc. LEXIS 1308

Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided December 21, 1973·No. No. State 19·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The following opinion was filed on February 5, 1974.

Per Curiam

(on motion for rehearing). Plaintiff in error, David Aller, has moved for rehearing on the issue of whether evidence of a drug sale subsequent to that for which he was being tried was admissible in his trial on the initial charge. While the issue was properly preserved for appeal, the evidence was clearly admissible to rebut the defense of entrapment. State v. Monsoor (1973), 56 Wis. 2d 689, 203 N. W. 2d 20. “. . . This evidence need not be confined to past felony convictions and criminal reputation, and, as we have held, need not be limited to conduct occurring prior in time to the crime charged. . . .” Id. at pages 703, 704.

Motion for rehearing denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The following opinion was filed on February 5, 1974.

Per Curiam

(on motion for rehearing). Plaintiff in error, David Aller, has moved for rehearing on the issue of whether evidence of a drug sale subsequent to that for which he was being tried was admissible in his trial on the initial charge. While the issue was properly preserved for appeal, the evidence was clearly admissible to rebut the defense of entrapment. State v. Monsoor (1973), 56 Wis. 2d 689, 203 N. W. 2d 20. “. . . This evidence need not be confined to past felony convictions and criminal reputation, and, as we have held, need not be limited to conduct occurring prior in time to the crime charged. . . .” Id. at pages 703, 704.

Motion for rehearing denied.

Aller v. State, 212 N.W.2d 702, 61 Wis. 2d 740, 1973 Wisc. LEXIS 1308 (Wis. 1973).

Pincite

212 N.W.2d 702 (Aller v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related