History
  • No items yet
midpage
Williams v. State
127 Ind. 471
Ind.
1891
Check Treatment
Elliott, J.

The appellants were convicted of the crime of rape, and from the judgment entered against them they prosecute this appeal.

It is asserted that the trial court erred in excluding a report made by the gránd jury, but the report is not embodied in the bill of exceptions, and hence no question is presented upon the ruling. In the absence of the document we can not say that it was competent, but must presume that it was incompetent. An appellant who seeks a reversal must overcome the-presumption which always prevails in favor of the rulings of the trial court in the absence of countervailing facts.

We have given the evidence careful study, and find that it so far and sufficiently supports the verdict that we can not disturb it.

Judgment affirmed.

McBride, J., did not take part in the decision of this case.

Case Details

Case Name: Williams v. State
Court Name: Indiana Supreme Court
Date Published: Mar 18, 1891
Citation: 127 Ind. 471
Docket Number: No. 15,963
Court Abbreviation: Ind.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.