Schweigel v. State, No. 30425

Docket NºNo. 30425
Citation245 Ind. 6, 195 N.E.2d 848
Case DateFebruary 04, 1964
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

Page 848

195 N.E.2d 848
245 Ind. 6
Dick SCHWEIGEL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
No. 30425.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
Feb. 4, 1964.

[245 Ind. 7] William C. Erbecker, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen., Indiana, Edgar S. Husted, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.

ARTERBURN, Judge.

The appellant and Ted Powell were jointly charged with burglary in the second degree. Apparently the appellant was tried separately. The jury found the defendant guilty and he was sentenced accordingly. He claims error in the overruling of his motion for a new trial.

The only specification therein which we may properly consider is No. 2, which states that the verdict of the jury is not sustained by sufficient evidence and is contrary to law.

Item No. 5 with reference to Instruction No. 14 is waived, since nothing is presented thereon in appellant's brief.

The other items listed in the motion for a new trial are imperfectly presented by reason of not being sufficiently specific for either the trial court or this court to rule thereon. If the errors are based upon questions and objections thereto in the taking of

Page 849

testimony, the specifications do not set out the questions nor the objections. For example, specification No. 1 states:

[245 Ind. 8] 'The court erred in stating in the presence of the jury that the general rule of law was that one defendant was bound by the statement made in his presence by another.'

There is no showing that any objection was made thereto and if objections were made, what the specifications were. Triggs, etc. v. State (1958), 238 Ind. 260, 149 N.E.2d 545; Hammond et al. v. State (1960), 240 Ind. 313, 164 N.E.2d 640.

We come, therefore, to the consideration of whether or not there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict of the jury. In that respect the appellant contends that there is no direct evidence showing that appellant actually committed the burglary. The State admits this, but says the facts are circumstantial and sufficient for a jury to arrive at the reasonable hypothesis that the appellant was guilty of the crime charged. Dennison v. State (1952), 230 Ind. 353, 103 N.E.2d 443.

In reviewing the evidence we may consider only that most favorable to the sustaining of the verdict. We may not reweigh the evidence if there is a conflict. Schlegel v. State (1950), 228 Ind. 205, 91 N.E.2d 167; Dennison v. State, supra.

The testimony in brief shows that a police officer of Greenwood, Indiana...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 practice notes
  • Calvert v. State, No. 31008
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • August 26, 1968
    ...where his credibility has been impeached or where the evidence leads them reasonably to a contrary conclusion.' Schweigel v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 6, 195 N.E.2d The appellant in Tait v. State (1963), 244 Ind. 35, 188 N.E.2d 537, was convicted of entering to commit a felony, and alleged ins......
  • Easton v. State, No. 30782
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • July 20, 1967
    ...added.) Cases cited in support of this rule are Harrison v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 336, 197 N.E.2d 770; Schweigel v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 6, 195 N.E.2d 848; Tait v. State (1963), 244 Ind. 35, 188 N.E.2d An analysis of the cases cited in support of the rule in the Higgins case, supra, indi......
  • Spight v. State, No. 30564
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • June 16, 1967
    ...every failure to object to an error in a trial is evidence of incompetency. Supreme Court Rule 2--17(e), (f); Schweigel v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 6, 195 N.E.2d 848; Stice v. State (1950), 228 Ind. 144, 89 N.E.2d 915. Also there is a contention made that the evidence does not sustain the fin......
  • Walker v. State, No. 30328
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • March 11, 1965
    ...credibility has been impeached or where the evidence leads them reeasonably to a contrary conclusion.' Schweigel v. State (1964), Ind., 195 N.E.2d 848, 850; 22 C.J.S. Criminal Law Sec. 96, p. 276; Roberson V. State (1943), 69 Ga.App. 541, 26 S.E.2d 142; Clark v. State (1953), 159 Tex.Cr.R. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
17 cases
  • Calvert v. State, No. 31008
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • August 26, 1968
    ...where his credibility has been impeached or where the evidence leads them reasonably to a contrary conclusion.' Schweigel v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 6, 195 N.E.2d The appellant in Tait v. State (1963), 244 Ind. 35, 188 N.E.2d 537, was convicted of entering to commit a felony, and alleged ins......
  • Easton v. State, No. 30782
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • July 20, 1967
    ...added.) Cases cited in support of this rule are Harrison v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 336, 197 N.E.2d 770; Schweigel v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 6, 195 N.E.2d 848; Tait v. State (1963), 244 Ind. 35, 188 N.E.2d An analysis of the cases cited in support of the rule in the Higgins case, supra, indi......
  • Spight v. State, No. 30564
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • June 16, 1967
    ...every failure to object to an error in a trial is evidence of incompetency. Supreme Court Rule 2--17(e), (f); Schweigel v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 6, 195 N.E.2d 848; Stice v. State (1950), 228 Ind. 144, 89 N.E.2d 915. Also there is a contention made that the evidence does not sustain the fin......
  • Walker v. State, No. 30328
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • March 11, 1965
    ...credibility has been impeached or where the evidence leads them reeasonably to a contrary conclusion.' Schweigel v. State (1964), Ind., 195 N.E.2d 848, 850; 22 C.J.S. Criminal Law Sec. 96, p. 276; Roberson V. State (1943), 69 Ga.App. 541, 26 S.E.2d 142; Clark v. State (1953), 159 Tex.Cr.R. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT