State Ex Rel. Davenport v. Brown

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State Ex Rel. Davenport v. Brown

203 N.W. 286, 162 Minn. 520, 1925 Minn. LEXIS 1550

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedApril 9, 1925

DocketNo. 24,799.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 203 N.W. 286 (State Ex Rel. Davenport v. Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State Ex Rel. Davenport v. Brown, 203 N.W. 286, 162 Minn. 520, 1925 Minn. LEXIS 1550 (Mich. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from an order discharging a writ of habeas corpus. By stipulation the ease was submitted here on the evidence taken below. The sole issue concerns relator’s whereabouts on December 8, 1924, on which day occurred, at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the bank robbery with active participation in which relator is charged. The evidence is conflicting, relator’s witnesses saying that he was in Minneapolis on that day and those contra that he was in Milwaukee. Moreover the circumstances permit a strong argument that relator’s witnesses, or some of them at least, are mistaken as to the date of their meetings with relator in Minneapolis. So it is clear that the evidence does not establish, conclusively, that relator is not a fugitive from the justice of Wisconsin, and, under the rule of In re appeal of Sanders, 154 Minn. 41, 191 N. W. 391, and the cases cited, the writ was properly discharged and the order must be .affirmed.

So ordered.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from an order discharging a writ of habeas corpus. By stipulation the ease was submitted here on the evidence taken below. The sole issue concerns relator’s whereabouts on December 8, 1924, on which day occurred, at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the bank robbery with active participation in which relator is charged. The evidence is conflicting, relator’s witnesses saying that he was in Minneapolis on that day and those contra that he was in Milwaukee. Moreover the circumstances permit a strong argument that relator’s witnesses, or some of them at least, are mistaken as to the date of their meetings with relator in Minneapolis. So it is clear that the evidence does not establish, conclusively, that relator is not a fugitive from the justice of Wisconsin, and, under the rule of In re appeal of Sanders, 154 Minn. 41, 191 N. W. 391, and the cases cited, the writ was properly discharged and the order must be .affirmed.

So ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 N.W. 286, 162 Minn. 520, 1925 Minn. LEXIS 1550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-davenport-v-brown-minn-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack