Knapp v. State
Supreme Court of Indiana
79 N.E. 1076 (Ind. 1907)
Knapp (defendant) was on trial for murder. In trying to prove that he killed the victim in self-defense, Knapp testified that he had heard a story that the victim, who was a police officer, clubbed and seriously injured an elderly man while in the process of arresting him. When asked, Knapp could not recall who told him the story. In response, the prosecution submitted evidence that the elderly man had actually died of senility and alcoholism and had no violent marks on his body when he died. The trial court admitted this evidence and convicted Knapp of murder. Knapp appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Gillett, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 171,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.