Diebold v. People

Opinion by

Clifford H. Darrow, District Judge. *

Plaintiff in error, hereinafter referred to as defendant, seeks review of certain alleged errors occurring at his trial upon a charge of grand larceny. His conviction rested almost wholly upon circumstantial evidence.

The information was filed June 13, 1967, under C.R.S. 1963, 40-5-2, which was subsequently repealed and reenacted.

I

The first of defendant’s assertions, and the one which we believe to be the most important, is that there was insufficient evidence to justify the “guilty” verdict. We conclude that the evidence was sufficient.

The…