State v. Dingman

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
Writing for the CourtFRITZ
Citation300 N.W. 244,239 Wis. 188
Decision Date02 December 1941
PartiesSTATE v. DINGMAN.

239 Wis. 188
300 N.W. 244

STATE
v.
DINGMAN.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Oct. 7, 1941.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 2, 1941.


Appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Wood County; Herman J. Severson, Circuit Judge.

Affirmed.

[300 N.W. 245]

Petition for a writ of coram nobis was filed by Elmer Dingman to review his conviction and sentence by the circuit court for Wood county on the charge of first degree murder. After a hearing and the consideration of affidavits filed on behalf of Dingman, and counter-affidavits filed by the State, the court denied his motion for the writ and he appealed.

Harold V. Schoenecker, of Milwaukee, (Stewart G. Honeck, of Milwaukee, of counsel), for appellant.

John E. Martin, Atty. Gen., William A. Platz, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Daniel T. Hosek, Dist. Atty., of Marshfield, for respondent.


FRITZ, Justice.

On October 10, 1935, the appellant, Elmer Dingman, was found guilty of murder in the first degree on a trial by jury in the circuit court for Wood county, Circuit Judge Byron B. Park, presiding. The charge was based on the murder at about 3 A.M. on August 5, 1933, of police officer Beell, while he was investigating a burglary which was being committed by four men at the office of a brewery at Marshfield. Judge Park denied a motion for a new trial made by Dingman before judgment was entered; and subsequently on March 1, 1937, likewise denied Dingman's motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. In July, 1940, Dingman filed his petition for a writ of coram nobis and the hearing of his motion for the writ was before Circuit Judge Herman J. Severson, Judge Park's successor in office. On October 31, 1940, Judge Severson entered an order denying Dingman's petition for a writ of coram nobis, and from that order this appeal was taken on December 18, 1940. Dingman then also appealed from the judgment convicting him, of the murder, which was entered October 10, 1935, and from the order of March 1, 1937, denying his motion for a new trial. His appeals from the latter order and the judgment were dismissed on April 15, 1941, on the ground that they were not taken within the time limited by statute. State v. Dingman, 237 Wis. 584, 297 N.W. 367.

On the trial which resulted in Dingman's conviction on October 10, 1935, the matter in controversy was principally the identification of Dingman as one of four men who participated in the commission of the burglary and the resulting murder of officer Beell. All of the four escaped on the night of the crime. One of them, Edward Gabriel, was shot that night, and the next day his body was found on a roadside in Minnesota. Another participant, Joe Webster, was subsequently arrested and finally filed a plea of guilty to the charge of murder in the third degree, and was convicted and sentenced on that charge. After that Dingman, who had been returned to the state penitentiary of Nebraska to serve an unexpired sentence upon violating the terms under which he had been released on probation, was arrested upon being identified at the penitentiary by Frank Heinzen, who resided opposite the brewery office and claimed to have witnessed in part the commission of the crime. On the trial of Dingman his identification as a participant in the crime depended largely upon Heinzen's testimony; and Dingman's defense was based largely on an alibi which he sought to establish by proof that he registered as “Mr. and Mrs. J. Marks”, with Helen Marks as his wife, at a hotel in Madison at 10:45 P.M. on August 4, 1933, and that under the name of “J. Marks” he had applied for an automobile license on the morning of August 5, 1933, at the Madison office of the state Motor Vehicle Division. He did not testify at the trial. On his motion after judgment for a new trial based on affidavits as to newly discovered evidence he relied upon matters which he claimed disproved his participation in the crime and his identification by Heinzen's testimony. Likewise, in support of his motion for a writ of coram nobis Dingman relied upon many matters alleged in his petition and stated in affidavits filed by him to disprove the identification of Dingman and his participation in the crime, and to impeach Heinzen's testimony as to his identification of Dingman; and to also impeach the testimony and condemn the conduct of Charles Pors as district attorney in investigating

[300 N.W. 246]

the crime and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Jessen v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • 1 April 1980
    ...State v. Turpin, 255 Wis. 358, 38 N.W.2d 495 (1949), cert. den. 338 U.S. 936, 70 S.Ct. 351, 94 L.Ed. 577 (1950); State v. Dingman, 239 Wis. 188, 300 N.W. 244 (1941); State v. Wagner, 232 Wis. 138, 286 N.W. 544 (1939); Gelosi v. State, 218 Wis. 289, 260 N.W. 442 (1935); Ernst v. State, 181 W......
  • Houston v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • 5 May 1959
    ...1923, 181 Wis. 155, 193 N.W. 978. See also State ex rel. Davis v. Superior Court, 1896, 15 Wash. 339, 46 P. 399; State v. Dingman, 1941, 239 Wis. 188, 300 N.W. [7 Wis.2d 353] The plaintiff in error contends that at least the trial court should have held a hearing to determine the truthfulne......
  • State v. Schultz, No. 90-2786-CR
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • 26 March 1992
    ...Wis.2d 573, 576, 141 N.W.2d 196, 198 (1966). On appeal, we will reverse only if the circuit court abused its discretion. State v. Dingman, 239 Wis. 188, 192, 300 N.W. 244, 246 Contrary to Schultz's contention, the previous denial of an arrest warrant was filed with the Green County Circuit ......
  • Fritz v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • 29 September 1964
    ...345. 4 Ernst v. State (1923), 181 Wis. 155, 193 N.W. 978. 5 Wilson v. State (1956), 273 Wis. 522, 78 N.W.2d 917; State v. Dingman (1941), 239 Wis. 188, 300 N.W. 6 Sec. 939.05(2), Stats., provides: '939.05 Parties to crime. * * * (2) A person is concerned in the commission of the crime if he......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Jessen v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • 1 April 1980
    ...State v. Turpin, 255 Wis. 358, 38 N.W.2d 495 (1949), cert. den. 338 U.S. 936, 70 S.Ct. 351, 94 L.Ed. 577 (1950); State v. Dingman, 239 Wis. 188, 300 N.W. 244 (1941); State v. Wagner, 232 Wis. 138, 286 N.W. 544 (1939); Gelosi v. State, 218 Wis. 289, 260 N.W. 442 (1935); Ernst v. State, 181 W......
  • Houston v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • 5 May 1959
    ...1923, 181 Wis. 155, 193 N.W. 978. See also State ex rel. Davis v. Superior Court, 1896, 15 Wash. 339, 46 P. 399; State v. Dingman, 1941, 239 Wis. 188, 300 N.W. [7 Wis.2d 353] The plaintiff in error contends that at least the trial court should have held a hearing to determine the truthfulne......
  • State v. Schultz, No. 90-2786-CR
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • 26 March 1992
    ...Wis.2d 573, 576, 141 N.W.2d 196, 198 (1966). On appeal, we will reverse only if the circuit court abused its discretion. State v. Dingman, 239 Wis. 188, 192, 300 N.W. 244, 246 Contrary to Schultz's contention, the previous denial of an arrest warrant was filed with the Green County Circuit ......
  • Fritz v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • 29 September 1964
    ...345. 4 Ernst v. State (1923), 181 Wis. 155, 193 N.W. 978. 5 Wilson v. State (1956), 273 Wis. 522, 78 N.W.2d 917; State v. Dingman (1941), 239 Wis. 188, 300 N.W. 6 Sec. 939.05(2), Stats., provides: '939.05 Parties to crime. * * * (2) A person is concerned in the commission of the crime if he......
  • 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