State v. Myles

Nebraska Supreme Court

State v. Myles

210 N.W.2d 927, 190 Neb. 585, 1973 Neb. LEXIS 750

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Myles. Read the opinion of the Court — 187 Neb. 105 →

Nebraska Supreme Court·Decided October 5, 1973·No. No. 38837·Published

Opinion

Newton, J.

On trial to a jury, defendant was convicted of unlawfully entering a bank and of shooting with intent to kill, wound, or maim. The only assignment of error challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict.

The record discloses the uncontradicted identification of defendant as a participant by two eyewitnesses. The evidence is sufficient. See Rule 20.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Clinton, J., concurs in the result.

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

Newton, J.

On trial to a jury, defendant was convicted of unlawfully entering a bank and of shooting with intent to kill, wound, or maim. The only assignment of error challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict.

The record discloses the uncontradicted identification of defendant as a participant by two eyewitnesses. The evidence is sufficient. See Rule 20.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Clinton, J., concurs in the result.

State v. Myles, 210 N.W.2d 927, 190 Neb. 585, 1973 Neb. LEXIS 750 (Neb. 1973).

Pincite

210 N.W.2d 927 (State v. Myles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.