State v. Calloway

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Calloway

34 So. 2d 399, 213 La. 129, 1948 La. LEXIS 835

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedFebruary 16, 1948

DocketNo. 38790.

StatusPublished

This text of 34 So. 2d 399 (State v. Calloway) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Calloway, 34 So. 2d 399, 213 La. 129, 1948 La. LEXIS 835 (La. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

BOND, Justice.

The defendant, Wilson Calloway, having been convicted of “simple battery” upon a 15 year old girl, was sentenced to serve 7 months in the Parish Prison. He is appealing from his conviction and sentence, relying for the reversal thereof on a lone bill of exception reserved to the trial judge’s ruling in refusing his motion for a new trial, the basis of which is that the verdict is “unjust and unfair” and “contrary to the law and evidence”. This motion presents only a question of fact over which we have no appellate jurisdiction. Art. 516, Code of Criminal Procedure. It is only when there is no evidence at all to *131 support the crime charged or an essential element thereof that this court is authorized to review the evidence. State v. Nomey, 204 La. 667, 16 So.2d 226, and State v. Valentine, 203 La. 1057, 1058, 14 So.2d 851.

The conviction and sentence are affirmed.

O’NIELL, C. J., absent.

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

BOND, Justice.

The defendant, Wilson Calloway, having been convicted of “simple battery” upon a 15 year old girl, was sentenced to serve 7 months in the Parish Prison. He is appealing from his conviction and sentence, relying for the reversal thereof on a lone bill of exception reserved to the trial judge’s ruling in refusing his motion for a new trial, the basis of which is that the verdict is “unjust and unfair” and “contrary to the law and evidence”. This motion presents only a question of fact over which we have no appellate jurisdiction. Art. 516, Code of Criminal Procedure. It is only when there is no evidence at all to *131 support the crime charged or an essential element thereof that this court is authorized to review the evidence. State v. Nomey, 204 La. 667, 16 So.2d 226, and State v. Valentine, 203 La. 1057, 1058, 14 So.2d 851.

The conviction and sentence are affirmed.

O’NIELL, C. J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 So. 2d 399, 213 La. 129, 1948 La. LEXIS 835, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-calloway-la-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack