Bauer v. People

Supreme Court of Colorado

Bauer v. People

86 P.2d 1088, 103 Colo. 449, 1939 Colo. LEXIS 338

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedJanuary 23, 1939

DocketNo. 14,400.

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 86 P.2d 1088 (Bauer v. People) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bauer v. People, 86 P.2d 1088, 103 Colo. 449, 1939 Colo. LEXIS 338 (Colo. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Francis E. Bouck

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant, John Bauer, was found guilty of driving an automobile on June 20', 1937, while under the influence of intoxicating* liquor, having previously,- namely, on October 28, 1935, been convicted of a similar offense. He asks us to reverse his conviction and the resulting sentence of six months’ imprisonment in jail and payment of a $250- fine and the costs.

There was no objection by the defendant to any of the instructions given by the court.

The only two reasons assigned in favor of a reversal are, first, that the state failed to prove the defendant to have actually imbibed intoxicating liquor and, second, that the court admitted evidence of previous police court convictions of drunkenness and of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, offenses under the ordinances of the. city of Sterling.

To prove that a person was intoxicated it is not necessary to prove the process, often a secret one, by which he got intoxicated. The state of intoxication is a condition as to the. existence of which even a lay witness may express his opinion. The first contention is therefore overruled.

As for the evidence of convictions in police court, in the circumstances shown by the. record before us, it was admissible by way of impeachment. The jurors were so instructed. Moreover, the testimony of the defendant *451 on direct examination may well be regarded as opening the door, for sncb evidence.

There was a sharp conflict in the evidence. The jurors, who saw and heard the witnesses on the witness stand, were charged with the duty of determining the credibility of those witnesses and the weight of their testimony. We have no right to interfere with their determination of the facts. The trial court committed no reversible error.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Hilliard and Mr. Justice Bock concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI