Revelle v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the trial court did not err by refusing to instruct the jury on the definition of “firearm” set forth in Beaudette because the defendant did not dispute that the charged weapon was a “firearm” under RSA 159:3
• instructions reviewed in their entirety not by looking at single instruction in isolation
• when defendant was charged with possessing a .357 Dan Wesson handgun and witnesses referred to the handgun as a “firearm” at trial, there was no need for trial court to instruct jury that a firearm is “a weapon from which shot is discharged by gunpowder” (quotation omitted)
• when defendant was charged with possessing a .357 Dan Wesson handgun and witnesses referred to the handgun as a “firearm” at trial, there was no need for trial court to instruct jury that a firearm is “a weapon from which shot is discharged by gunpowder” (quotation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).