McCormack v. State

Arizona Supreme Court

McCormack v. State

33 P.2d 282, 43 Ariz. 555, 1934 Ariz. LEXIS 283

CourtArizona Supreme Court

DecidedJune 5, 1934

DocketCriminal No. 804.

StatusPublished

This text of 33 P.2d 282 (McCormack v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McCormack v. State, 33 P.2d 282, 43 Ariz. 555, 1934 Ariz. LEXIS 283 (Ark. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

This is a companion case to DeMille v. State, ante, p. 551,33 P.2d 280, just decided. The information in the two cases was joint, but a severance was demanded and granted, and the defendants were tried separately. The cases involve the same transaction, and the assignments of error are identical.

For the reasons stated in the DeMille case, we have considered only the assignment that the verdict was contrary to the evidence and have examined the record for fundamental error. We have read the transcript of evidence, and there is ample testimony therein to sustain the verdict of the jury. The record on its face shows that the defendant was tried, convicted, and sentenced according to law, and the judgment is therefore affirmed.

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

This is a companion case to DeMille v. State, ante, p. 551,33 P.2d 280, just decided. The information in the two cases was joint, but a severance was demanded and granted, and the defendants were tried separately. The cases involve the same transaction, and the assignments of error are identical.

For the reasons stated in the DeMille case, we have considered only the assignment that the verdict was contrary to the evidence and have examined the record for fundamental error. We have read the transcript of evidence, and there is ample testimony therein to sustain the verdict of the jury. The record on its face shows that the defendant was tried, convicted, and sentenced according to law, and the judgment is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 P.2d 282, 43 Ariz. 555, 1934 Ariz. LEXIS 283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccormack-v-state-ariz-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack