STATE V. DISBROW
130 Iowa 19, 106 N.W. 263 (1906)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an appeal from a conviction for embezzlement.
FACTS: The evidence showed that Disbrow (D) had embezzled a number of times over a period
of six years. The state had a three-year statute of limitations. The first indictment was
set aside because it was defective. D was indicted a second time. Some of the charges in the
second indictment would not be triable unless the statute of limitations was tolled from the
first indictment. The trial court decided on tolling the statute. The trial judge instructed
the jury that D could be convicted of all his acts of embezzlement that had occurred within
three years prior to the return of his first indictment. D was convicted and appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment