Hinton v. Youngblood

63 N.E.2d 196, 224 Ind. 16, 1946 Ind. LEXIS 89
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 15, 1946
DocketNo. 28,151.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 63 N.E.2d 196 (Hinton v. Youngblood) 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.

Bluebook
Hinton v. Youngblood, 63 N.E.2d 196, 224 Ind. 16, 1946 Ind. LEXIS 89 (Ind. 1946).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Relator seeks a writ of mandate to compel respondent to hear a petition for writ of error coram nobis. The response shows that the cause is not pending before respondent but before the judge who presided in the trial of the case at the time of relator’s conviction. Accordingly the petition is dismissed.

Note.—Reported in 63 N. E. (2d) *196.

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Joint County Park Board v. Verbarg
91 N.E.2d 916 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
63 N.E.2d 196, 224 Ind. 16, 1946 Ind. LEXIS 89, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinton-v-youngblood-ind-1946.