Gray v. State
This text of 145 N.E.2d 896 (Gray v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Petitioner herein has attempted pro se to perfect an appeal to this court under Rule 2-40. The papers which he has filed contain no proper assignment of error, nor do they contain any of the record necessary to present the questions which [702]*702petitioner is apparently attempting to raise, nor does it in any manner comply with the provisions of Rule 2-40.
The petition is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on this court under Rule 2-40, and for this reason it should be dismissed. Davis v. Pelley (1952), 230 Ind. 248, 251, 102 N. E. 2d 910; Bolden v. State (1955), 234 Ind. 708, 130 N. E. 2d 52.
Petition dismissed.
Note. — Reported in 145 N. E. 2d 896.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
145 N.E.2d 896, 237 Ind. 701, 1957 Ind. LEXIS 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-state-ind-1957.