State v. Naughten
471 P.2d 830, 3 Or. App. 241, 1970 Ore. App. LEXIS 504
Opinion
Defendant was tried and convicted upon jury trial of the crime of assault and robbery being armed with a dangerous weapon. He did not take the witness stand.
His sole ground of appeal is that the trial court erred in instructing the jury:
“Every witness is presumed to speak the truth. This presumption may be overcome by the manner in which the witness testifies, by the nature of his or her testimony, by evidence affecting his or her character, interest, or motives, by contradictory evidence, or by a presumption.”
This instruction is not erroneous. State v. Kessler, 254 Or 124, 458 P2d 432 (1969); State v. Blank, 1 Or App 550, 464 P2d 836 (1970).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Naughten, 471 P.2d 830, 3 Or. App. 241, 1970 Ore. App. LEXIS 504 (Or. Ct. App. 1970).
471 P.2d 830 (State v. Naughten) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Dowell
516 P.2d 1305 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1973)
Hugh Naughten v. Hoyt C. Cupp, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary
476 F.2d 845 (Ninth Circuit, 1973)