State v. Blank

Idaho Supreme Court

State v. Blank

197 P. 821, 33 Idaho 730, 1921 Ida. LEXIS 52

CourtIdaho Supreme Court

DecidedMay 2, 1921

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 197 P. 821 (State v. Blank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Blank, 197 P. 821, 33 Idaho 730, 1921 Ida. LEXIS 52 (Idaho 1921).

Pincite

Opinions

DUNN, J.

Appellant was tried in the district court of Washington county on a charge of grand larceny, convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for not less than one [732]*732nor more than fourteen years. He has appealed to this eourt and assigns as errors the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict and the admission and rejection of certain testimony.

The claim that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict rests upon the contention that the colt which was the subject of the alleged larceny was not sufficiently identified to warrant the conviction of the appellant. It must be admitted that the evidence of identification was very weak. "Whether it could properly be held sufficient to support the -verdict, if that question were before us under other conditions than those present in this case, it is not necessary for us to decide. Over the objection of appellant very much matter was admitted in evidence which could not fail to be highly prejudicial to him. Much of this matter tended to show that appellant had been guilty of other crimes having no connection whatever with the offense for which he was being tried. It seems impossible that the jury could have been wholly uninfluenced against appellant by this immaterial and irrelevant matter.

It clearly appears from the record in this case that the appellant was not accorded a fair trial. The judgment is therefore reversed and a new trial granted.

Rice, C. J., and Lee, J., concur.

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

DUNN, J.

Appellant was tried in the district court of Washington county on a charge of grand larceny, convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for not less than one [732]*732nor more than fourteen years. He has appealed to this eourt and assigns as errors the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict and the admission and rejection of certain testimony.

The claim that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict rests upon the contention that the colt which was the subject of the alleged larceny was not sufficiently identified to warrant the conviction of the appellant. It must be admitted that the evidence of identification was very weak. "Whether it could properly be held sufficient to support the -verdict, if that question were before us under other conditions than those present in this case, it is not necessary for us to decide. Over the objection of appellant very much matter was admitted in evidence which could not fail to be highly prejudicial to him. Much of this matter tended to show that appellant had been guilty of other crimes having no connection whatever with the offense for which he was being tried. It seems impossible that the jury could have been wholly uninfluenced against appellant by this immaterial and irrelevant matter.

It clearly appears from the record in this case that the appellant was not accorded a fair trial. The judgment is therefore reversed and a new trial granted.

Rice, C. J., and Lee, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 P. 821, 33 Idaho 730, 1921 Ida. LEXIS 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-blank-idaho-1921.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack