Holmes v. State
This text of 127 N.W. 1067 (Holmes v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Defendant was convicted, in the district court for Harlan county, of the crime of assault and battery, and fined [711]*711$100 and costs. lie prosecuted error to this court, and obtained a judgment of reversal. Holmes v. State, 85 Neb. 506. Upon a second trial he was again convicted, and sentenced as before, and the record is before us for review.
It would serve no good purpose to set out the evidence, as it amply sustains the verdict of the jury. Complaint is made of the seventh, eighth, eleventh and twelfth instructions given by the court, and of the refusal of the court to give instruction numbered 2 requested by defendant. These objections are so clearly without merit that nothing could be gained by setting them out here. The examination of the entire record shows that the case was fairly tried and properly submitted to the jury; that defendant has been twice found guilty of the offense charged, by a jury of his county, and that he ought to pay the penalty of his unwarranted belligerency.
The judgment of the district court is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
127 N.W. 1067, 87 Neb. 710, 1910 Neb. LEXIS 287, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holmes-v-state-neb-1910.