Comoli v. State
63 A. 186, 78 Vt. 423, 1906 Vt. LEXIS 167
Opinion
It is considered that the newly discovered evidence attached to the petition would not be likely to produce a different result on another trial.
It is also' considered that the affidavits thereto attached do- not show the requisite diligence. They state only that the affiants “used due diligence,” which is only an opinion, upon which the Court cannot act. They should have stated the facts, that the Court might judge of the matter.
Petition dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Comoli v. State, 63 A. 186, 78 Vt. 423, 1906 Vt. LEXIS 167 (Vt. 1906).
63 A. 186 (Comoli v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Hathorn
138 A. 738 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1927)
Ploof v. Putnam
76 A. 145 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1910)
Hemmenway v. Lincoln
73 A. 1073 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1909)