Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

142 Wis. 143

Van Haltren v. State

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 22, 1910

Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1910-02-22

<p> Criminal law: Appeal: Sufficiency of evidence. </p> <p>Tile verdict in a criminal case win not be disturbed on appeal if there is any credible evidence which in any reasonable view supports it.</p>

Relies on Lam Yee v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1910-02-22

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1938

5 state decisions

30191019201930decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

RakNes, J.

¶1The plaintiff in error was convicted of the-crime of larceny, and from a judgment entered upon the verdict of guilty he prosecutes a writ of error in this court. The sole ground relied upon for a reversal of such judgment is that the evidence was not sufficient to support tire verdict.. “If there is any credible evidence which in any reasonable view supports a verdict it cannot be disturbed on appeal.” Lam Yee v. State, 132 Wis. 527, 529, 112 N. W. 425, and cases cited. A careful examination of the testimony convinces us that there is sufficient evidence in the record to-support the verdict, having in mind the rule quoted. No useful purpose would be served by summarizing- such evidence in this opinion. .

¶2By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

/142/wis/143 · .json · Public domain