Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Shannon

Montana Supreme Court

Decided October 31, 1933No. 7,145Published

1Dissent

Mr. Justice Angstman :

I dissent. In my opinion the cross-examination of defendant relative to passing counterfeit money in Billings does not necessitate the granting of a new trial. Defendant was charged with having in his possession “apparatus, paper and other things made use of in counterfeiting bank notes or bills.” A vital issue in the case was whether the apparatus, paper and other things were capable of being used in counterfeiting.

Defendant on his direct examination testified: “I have heard the testimony of the state’s witnesses. All of this paraphernalia was used in connection with…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  2. State v. RichardsonMontana Supreme Court · 1922
  3. People v. BurnsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. York v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1916
  5. State v. GreenlandSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API