Vilscoff v. State
This text of 153 N.E. 802 (Vilscoff v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
An indictment in five counts was filed in the city court at Indianapolis against appellant, the third of which charged him with unlawfully possessing intoxicating liquor. On appeal to the criminal court, he was found guilty, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $200 and be imprisoned at the Indiana State Farm for a term of sixty days. A motion for a new trial for the alleged reasons that the finding was not sustained by sufficient evidence and was contrary to law was overruled and he excepted. Overruling this motion is assigned as error.
We have examined the evidence and find that there was evidence which, if believed, sufficiently sustains the finding of guilty under the third count. Therefore no *413 error was committed in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial. Powers v. State (1882), 87 Ind. 97, 103; Parks v. State (1902), 159 Ind. 211, 215, 64 N. E. 862, 59 L. R. A. 190; Stucker v. State (1908), 171 Ind. 441, 443, 84 N. E. 971.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
153 N.E. 802, 198 Ind. 412, 1926 Ind. LEXIS 148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vilscoff-v-state-ind-1926.