Sisson v. State

• Decision Date: 21 June 1890
• Parties: SISSON v. STATE.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

77 Wis. 273

45 N.W. 1130

SISSON

v.STATE.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

June 21, 1890.

Appeal from circuit court, Winnebago county.

Clarke & McAuliffe, for plaintiff in error.

C. E. Estabrook, Atty. Gen., for the State.

TAYLOR, J.

This is a writ of error issued out of this court to the circuit court of Winnebago county, to bring up for review the judgment and proceedings in the case of the state of Wisconsin against the said Henry Sisson. The return to the writ of error shows that an information was filed by the district attorney of said county in the circuit court of Winnebago county on December 21, 1885, charging the said Henry Sisson with a felonious assault upon one Joseph Alger with intent to murder the said Alger, and in a second count charging the said Sisson, at the same time and place, with a felonious assault upon the said Alger with intent to do the said Alger great bodily harm. There is no contention but that the information charges in proper form the crime-- First, of a felonious assault, with intent to murder the said Alger; and, second, with a felonious assault with intent to do great bodily harm to the said Alger. The return also shows that the jury returned a verdict in the following language: “We find the defendant guilty of assault with intent to do great bodily harm, as charged in the second count in the information.” The record returned also shows that, on the petition of the defendant, certain witnesses were ordered to be summoned by the state to give testimony for the defendant on the trial in said circuit court. There also appear in said return certain instructions of the court to the jury in said action; also, the sentence and judgment of the court upon the verdict rendered by the jury, adjudging that the defendant be punished by imprisonment in the state-prison at hard labor for the term of one year, and to solitary confinement during said term for the space of one day, the time of sentence to begin January 15, 1886. The record returned also contains the certificate of the warden of the state-prison that the plaintiff in error was received into said prison under said sentence on the 16th day of January, 1886. The return further contains what purports to be the evidence taken before the justice of the peace on the preliminary examination before said justice, but none of the evidence produced upon his trial in the circuit court; and, finally, the return to the writ contains an affidavit made by John W. Hume on...