Legal Opinion

State v. Smith

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 18, 1967PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtLusk, J.

The defendant has appealed from a conviction of the crime of receiving and concealing stolen goods.

In the defendant’s brief error was assigned to the giving of the following instruction:

“There is evidence in this case that the defendant has formerlly (sic) been convicted of a crime. You are instructed that you may take into consideration this fact in determining the credit to be given to the testimony of the witness. It is only for this purpose that such evidence was received or allowed in evidence.”

There was no evidence that the defendant had been convicted of a crime and the state conceded…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1964
  2. State v. MeidelOregon Supreme Court · 1965

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API