Snoddy v. State
Snoddy v. State of Indiana
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Monks, J.
Appellant and seven other persons were charged in the court below with the crime of riotous conspiracy under the provisions of §2335 Burns 1908, Acts 1905 p. 584, §439.
Appellant was granted a separate trial and was convicted of said offense. The only error properly assigned is that the court erred in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial. The only cause for a new trial urged as a ground for reversal is that the court erred in overruling appellant’s motion for a continuance. The record in regard to said motion and the overruling thereof is in the same condition as in Adams v. State (1913), ante 44, 99 N. E. 483 , and on the authority of that case we hold that the affidavit for continuance is not a part of the record, and that no question is therefore presented as to the action of the court thereon.
There being nothing in the record to sustain appellant’s contention that the court erred in overruling his motion for a new trial, the judgment is affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.