State v. Stanton

It is first contended that the trial court erred in permitting the prosecutor, over objection, to introduce evidence of defendant’s refusal to take an intoximeter test and in further permitting the prosecutor to comment upon such failure in argument to the jury. For the reasons which we gave in Westerville v. Cunningham, ante 121, these claims of error are rejected.

It is contended further that, where a special instruction in writing before argument is given by the trial court, it is prejudicial error for the court to identify to the jury the party who requested that instruction.

In our…