State v. Dewald

Wyoming Supreme Court

State v. Dewald

57 P.2d 685, 50 Wyo. 39, 1936 Wyo. LEXIS 2

CourtWyoming Supreme Court

DecidedMay 12, 1936

DocketNo. 1946

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 P.2d 685 (State v. Dewald) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wyoming Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Dewald, 57 P.2d 685, 50 Wyo. 39, 1936 Wyo. LEXIS 2 (Wyo. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

This is a criminal case in which the state is represented in this court by the Attorney General, who has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that he was not served with appellant's brief within the time prescribed. See rules 15, 16, 21, 42 Wyo. 534, 535, *Page 41 536. The ground of the motion is confessed, and appellant has shown no excuse for failure to comply with the rules. The brief was served on the County and Prosecuting Attorney who represented the state in the trial court, and the proper number of copies of the brief were filed in this court, but this did not do away with the necessity of serving the Attorney General. See Wilhelm v. State, 13 Wyo. 511, 81 P. 882. The motion must be granted, and the appeal dismissed. Wilhelm v. State, supra; Grippen v. State,20 Wyo. 486, 124 P. 764, 128 P. 622; State v. Kelly, 33 Wyo. 420,240 P. 207.

As we have frequently said, it is not an agreeable duty of the court to dismiss an appeal for failure to follow rules of procedure. See Grippen v. State, supra, at p. 493 of 20 Wyo. In this case we have felt justified in taking the time necessary to read and consider the evidence. The sole contention of appellant is that the verdict is not supported by sufficient evidence. We think we could not hold that there is no substantial evidence to support the verdict.

Appeal dismissed.

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

This is a criminal case in which the state is represented in this court by the Attorney General, who has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that he was not served with appellant's brief within the time prescribed. See rules 15, 16, 21, 42 Wyo. 534, 535, *Page 41 536. The ground of the motion is confessed, and appellant has shown no excuse for failure to comply with the rules. The brief was served on the County and Prosecuting Attorney who represented the state in the trial court, and the proper number of copies of the brief were filed in this court, but this did not do away with the necessity of serving the Attorney General. See Wilhelm v. State, 13 Wyo. 511, 81 P. 882. The motion must be granted, and the appeal dismissed. Wilhelm v. State, supra; Grippen v. State,20 Wyo. 486, 124 P. 764, 128 P. 622; State v. Kelly, 33 Wyo. 420,240 P. 207.

As we have frequently said, it is not an agreeable duty of the court to dismiss an appeal for failure to follow rules of procedure. See Grippen v. State, supra, at p. 493 of 20 Wyo. In this case we have felt justified in taking the time necessary to read and consider the evidence. The sole contention of appellant is that the verdict is not supported by sufficient evidence. We think we could not hold that there is no substantial evidence to support the verdict.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 P.2d 685, 50 Wyo. 39, 1936 Wyo. LEXIS 2, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-dewald-wyo-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack