Fite v. State
Opinion
The court concludes the trial court correctly and completely responded to the jury’s inquiry of whether the defendant could be convicted on only an accomplice’s testimony. Testimony of an accomplice, even if it is uncorroborated, can support a verdict of guilty if it is of such a nature that it is entitled to belief. Jandrt v. State (1969), 43 Wis. 2d 497, 499, 168 N. W. 2d 602; see also: Cheney v. State (1969), 44 Wis. 2d 454, 467, 468, 171 N. W. 2d 339, 174 N. W. 2d 1.
Therefore, the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial.
The order is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
207 N.W.2d 672 (Fite v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.