State v. Mullen
This text of 30 Iowa 203 (State v. Mullen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Upon the trial, the baggage-master was introduced as a witness, and testified to the foregoing facts, and was proceeding to testify as to the identity and value- of the trunk, etc., when defendant, by his counsel, objected, unless the trunk was produced, or the receipt therefor, as required by Revision, sections 5048 and 5054. That objection was overruled, and the testimony admitted; and this is the first error assigned. The sections referred to simply direct the care and disposition to be made of stolen or embezzled property when taken by the officer from the accused, and [197]*197the receipts to be given therefor; but in no manner affect or limit the competency of testimony for either the State or the accused, respecting the same. There was, therefore, no error in overruling the objection.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
30 Iowa 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mullen-iowa-1870.