State v. Rolph

Oregon Supreme Court

State v. Rolph

406 P.2d 158, 241 Or. 410, 1965 Ore. LEXIS 419

DecidedSeptember 29, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 406 P.2d 158 (State v. Rolph) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon 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. Rolph, 406 P.2d 158, 241 Or. 410, 1965 Ore. LEXIS 419 (Or. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted of the charge of selling narcotics. A Portland police officer made the purchase from defendant. When defendant’s counsel cross-examined the officer he was permitted to question the officer at length as to the officer’s financial situation. It was an attempt to discredit the officer.

The state then called the policeman’s superior officer who was permitted, over objection, to testify to the policeman’s efficiency rating. In this appeal defendant claims the court erred in admitting the evidence. The error was immaterial. The evidence was so inconsequential and so irrelevant to the issue of guilt or innocence that it could not have been prejudicial.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted of the charge of selling narcotics. A Portland police officer made the purchase from defendant. When defendant’s counsel cross-examined the officer he was permitted to question the officer at length as to the officer’s financial situation. It was an attempt to discredit the officer.

The state then called the policeman’s superior officer who was permitted, over objection, to testify to the policeman’s efficiency rating. In this appeal defendant claims the court erred in admitting the evidence. The error was immaterial. The evidence was so inconsequential and so irrelevant to the issue of guilt or innocence that it could not have been prejudicial.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

406 P.2d 158, 241 Or. 410, 1965 Ore. LEXIS 419, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-rolph-or-1965.