Case ID: ind-l-rep_1/html/0818-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Elliott.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John P. Lannum v. The State ex rel. Margaret Roberts.
    1. Conflicting Evidence.—Where evidence is conflicting and some of it supports the verdict, the Supreme Court will not reverse.
    2. Certiorari to Amend Record.—Where the record does not show that any complaint'was filed below, the complaint, if existing, can be certified to the Supreme Court by means of a writ of certiorari.
    Filed June 2, 1881.
    Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court.
    McClurg & Kent, for appellant.
    Burk & Farber, for appellee.
   Opinion of the court by

Mr. Justice Elliott.

The appellant was prosecuted upon a charge of bastardy preferred against him by the relatrix, and from the judgments rendered against him has appealed.

Two points are here made by counsel. The first is, that the verdict is not supported by the evidence, but this can avail the appellant nothing, because, although the evidence is very conflicting, there is much supporting the conclusion arrived at by the jury. The second point (had counsel observed the logical order this would have been the first), is, that the record does not show that any complaint was filed before the justice. Since the 'brief was filed, the clerk, in obedience to a certiorari, has certified up the complaint, and the proposition of counsel is entirely without foundation.

Judgment affirmed.