Hoffman v. State

166 N.E. 158, 89 Ind. App. 710, 1929 Ind. App. LEXIS 247
CourtIndiana Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 26, 1929
DocketNo. 13,607.
StatusPublished

This text of 166 N.E. 158 (Hoffman v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hoffman v. State, 166 N.E. 158, 89 Ind. App. 710, 1929 Ind. App. LEXIS 247 (Ind. Ct. App. 1929).

Opinion

Enloe, C. J.

This is a companion case to the case of Cummins v. State (1929), ante 256, 166 N. E. 155. The only question presented in this case, as in that, is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict of the jury. There is less evidence to sustain the verdict in this case than in the Cummins case, which we this day reversed. In fact, upon oral argument of this case, the counsel for the State conceded the insufficiency of the evidence in this case. The judgment is reversed, with instructions to sustain the motion for a new trial.

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

Related

Cummins v. State
166 N.E. 155 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
166 N.E. 158, 89 Ind. App. 710, 1929 Ind. App. LEXIS 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoffman-v-state-indctapp-1929.