Schooler v. State
| Decision Date | 11 October 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 30662,30662 |
| Citation | Schooler v. State, 220 N.E.2d 344, 247 Ind. 624 (Ind. 1966) |
| Parties | Mary E. SCHOOLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
George R. Brawley, Ft. Wayne, for appellant.
John J. Dillon, Atty. Gen., David S. Wedding, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
In her petition for rehearing the appellant complains that the original court opinion did not deal with her allegation that her arrest was unlawful.
We are of the opinion that the facts stated in our original opinion were sufficient facts to demonstrate that the officers making the arrest had proper cause for believing that the appellant had committed a felony and that the arrest was not unlawful.
We are of the opinion that the other matters raised in the appellant's petition for rehearing are without merit.
The petition for rehearing is therefore denied.
JACKSON, J., voted for rehearing.
ACHOR, J., not participating.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Ellis v. State, 169
...is substantial evidence of probative value to support an inference of guilt. Schooler v. State (1966), 247 Ind. 624, 218 N.E.2d 135, 220 N.E.2d 344; Herman v. State (1965), 247 Ind. 7, 210 N.E.2d 249, cert. den. 384 U.S. 918, 86 S.Ct. 1364, 16 L.Ed.2d 439; Wagner v. State (1963), 243 Ind. 5......
-
Bullitt v. State, 2--873A185
...Stallings v. State (1967), 249 Ind. 110, 231 N.E.2d 29; Schooler v. State (1966), 247 Ind. 624, 218 N.E.2d 135; rehearing denied, 220 N.E.2d 344. In an analogous case our Supreme Court 'It is true that there is no direct evidence in the record that anyone actually saw the appellant remove a......