State v. Itczak

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Itczak

149 A. 892, 111 Conn. 719, 1930 Conn. LEXIS 187

DecidedMarch 6, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 149 A. 892 (State v. Itczak) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Itczak, 149 A. 892, 111 Conn. 719, 1930 Conn. LEXIS 187 (Colo. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

We have made an examination and comparison of the evidence and are convinced that the jury might reasonably have found the accused guilty as charged beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence was conflicting, both upon the charge of the information and upon the accused’s defense of an alibi. Under these circumstances it was the province of the jury to resolve this conflict. We cannot hold that the verdict should have been set aside. State v. Chin Lung, 106 Conn. 701, 704, 139 Atl. 91; State v. Cianflone, 98 Conn. 454, 459, 120 Atl. 347.

There is no error.

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

Pee Curiam.

We have made an examination and comparison of the evidence and are convinced that the jury might reasonably have found the accused guilty as charged beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence was conflicting, both upon the charge of the information and upon the accused’s defense of an alibi. Under these circumstances it was the province of the jury to resolve this conflict. We cannot hold that the verdict should have been set aside. State v. Chin Lung, 106 Conn. 701, 704, 139 Atl. 91; State v. Cianflone, 98 Conn. 454, 459, 120 Atl. 347.

There is no error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

149 A. 892, 111 Conn. 719, 1930 Conn. LEXIS 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-itczak-conn-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack