Case Name: The State v. Ray
Court: Supreme Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 1897-01-05
Citations: 146 Ind. 500
Docket Number: No. 17,712
Parties: The State v. Ray.
Judges: 
Reporter: Indiana Reports
Volume: 146
Pages: 500–501

Head Matter:
The State v. Ray.
[No. 17,712.
Filed January 5, 1897.]
Appeal and Eeeoe. — Assignment of Error. — Instructions to Jury.— Where an exception is made to the instructions given as an entirety, unless all of the instructions given were erroneous, an appeal thereon cannot he sustained.
From the Noble Circuit Court.
Affirmed.
W. A. Ketcham, Attorney-General, Merrill Moores, W. A. Glatte, Prosecuting Attorney, H. G. Zimmerman and H. C. Peterson, for State.
Luke H. Wrigley, for appellee.

Opinion:
Monks, J.
Appellee was prosecuted and acquitted of the crime of obtaining a bill of exchange by false pretenses.
The court gave to the jury thirty-four instructions at the request of appellee, to the giving of which appellant excepted. The exception was to the instructions given as an entirety, and not to each instruction separately. The giving of these instructions is assigned as error.
Under the well settled rule, unless all of said thirty-f.our instructions were, erroneous this appeal cannot be sustained. Lawrence v. Van Buskirk, 140 Ind. 481, and cases cited.
It is not claimed by appellant that all of said instructions are erroneous, and objections are only urged against part of them. Some of said instructions correctly stated the law and, under the rule, we can not review the action of the trial court in giving the others, however erroneous they may be.
The appeal is therefore not sustained.