State v. Clipston

The defendant was convicted of burglary.

Defendant contends that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of accomplices before there was any evidence, independent of the accomplices’ testimony, connecting the defendant with the crime. ORS 17.215 provides: “The order of proof shall be regulated by the sound discretion of the court.” The trial court did not abuse its discretion. See State v. Weston, 102 Or 102, 115, 201 P 1083 (1921).

The defendant requested the court to instruct the jury that in determining the credibility of the accomplices the jury should consider their status as…