1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Wis.2d
  4. 31 Wis.2d
  5. 31 Wis.2d 684 (1966)
 

O'CONNOR v. STATE

31 Wis.2d 684 (1966)

O'CONNOR, Plaintiff in error, v. STATE, Defendant in error.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

July 1, 1966.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the plaintiff in error there was a brief by James M. Shellow, attorney, and Shellow, Shellow & Coffey and William M. Coffey of counsel, all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by James M. Shellow and William M. Coffey.

For the defendant in error the cause was argued by Robert E. Sutton, assistant district attorney of Milwaukee county, with whom on the brief were Bronson C. La Follette, attorney general, and Hugh R. O'Connell, district attorney.

WILKIE, J.

Two issues are presented here: First, was it error for the prosecution to comment, during the voir dire examination, on the fact that there were going to be defense witnesses?

Second, did the trial court err in limiting the plaintiff in error's cross-examination of Schoenemann, a prosecution witness?

Reference to Defense Witnesses.

During the voir dire examination...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases