Okimosh v. State, 148 N.W.2d 652 (Wis. 1967). · Go Syfert
Search
Okimosh v. State, 148 N.W.2d 652 (Wis. 1967). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
16 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Okimosh, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
State, Defendant in Error
Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Feb 28, 1967.
148 N.W.2d 652
For the plaintiff in error there was a brief and oral argument by Albert J. Cirilli of Rhinelander., For the defendant in error the cause was argued by Betty R. Brown, assistant attorney general, with whom on the brief were Bronson C. La Follette, attorney general, and William A. Plat'z, assistant attorney general.
Wilkie.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published
Wilkie, J.

Within one year after defendant’s conviction defense counsel failed to present a motion to the trial court to have a new trial or to have the verdict set aside because of the alleged insufficiency of the evidence to support that verdict. We have held that failure to make such a motion at the trial court level bars the plaintiff in error from raising the question of the sufficient credible evidence produced at the trial in support of the verdict unless compelling circumstances exist which permit the question to be raised. [1] There are no compelling circumstances in this case that warrant an exception to this rule.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

1

State v. Van Beek (1966), 31 Wis. (2d) 51, 141 N. W. (2d) 873; State v. Thompson (1966), 31 Wis. (2d) 365, 142 N. W. (2d) 779.