Home/Wisconsin Supreme Court/Okimosh v. State

Okimosh v. State

148 N.W.2d 652, 34 Wis. 2d 120, 1967 Wisc. LEXIS 1070
Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided February 28, 1967·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Wilkie, J.

Within one year after defendant’s conviction defense counsel failed to present a motion to the trial court to have a new trial or to have the verdict set aside because of the alleged insufficiency of the evidence to support that verdict. We have held that failure to make such a motion at the trial court level bars the plaintiff in error from raising the question of the sufficient credible evidence produced at the trial in support of the verdict unless compelling circumstances exist which permit the question to be raised. 1 There are no compelling circumstances in this case that warrant an exception to this rule.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

1

State v. Van Beek (1966), 31 Wis. (2d) 51, 141 N. W. (2d) 873; State v. Thompson (1966), 31 Wis. (2d) 365, 142 N. W. (2d) 779.

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

Okimosh v. State, 148 N.W.2d 652, 34 Wis. 2d 120, 1967 Wisc. LEXIS 1070 (Wis. 1967).

148 N.W.2d 652 (Okimosh v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Walker
2006 WI 82 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2006)
State v. Charette
187 N.W.2d 203 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1971)
Claybrooks v. State
183 N.W.2d 139 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1971)
Davis v. State
181 N.W.2d 346 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1970)
State v. Escobedo
170 N.W.2d 709 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1969)
Sartin v. State
170 N.W.2d 727 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1969)
Gray v. State
161 N.W.2d 892 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1968)
Finger v. State
161 N.W.2d 272 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1968)