Case Name: Stoflet, Plaintiff in error, vs. The State, Defendant in error
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1930-01-07
Citations: 200 Wis. 438
Docket Number: 
Parties: Stoflet, Plaintiff in error, vs. The State, Defendant in error.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 200
Pages: 438–440

Head Matter:
Stoflet, Plaintiff in error, vs. The State, Defendant in error.
December 6, 1929
January 7, 1930.
For the plaintiff in error there was a brief by Rush & Devos of Neillsville and Goggins, Braseau & Graves of Wisconsin Rapids, and oral argument by T. W. Braseau.
For the defendant in error there was a brief by V. W. Nehs, district attorney of Clark county, the Attorney General, and J. E. Messer schmidt, assistant attorney general, and oral argument by Mr. Nehs.

Opinion:
Fowler, J.
The sole question raised is whether the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction. We are clearly of the opinion that it is not. The evidence was wholly circumstantial and falls far short of the quantum of evidence necessary to support conviction, as stated in Colbert v. State, 125 Wis. 423, 104 N. W. 61; Kollock v. State, 88 Wis. 663, 60 N. W. 817, and other cases that might be cited.
By the Court. — The judgment is reversed, and the warden of the state reformatory will forthwith discharge the defendant, W. A. Stoflet.