State v. Johnson

Defendant appeals from conviction and sentence for criminal activity in drugs, ORS 167.207, assigning as error the trial court’s ruling that the state could (and did) introduce rebuttal evidence to testimony defendant gave in cross-examination. Other errors are also asserted which do not merit reversal and need not be discussed in this opinion.

Defendant took the witness stand in his own defense. The fourth question asked him on direct examination was whether he had previously been convicted of crimes. He testified:

"Nineteen seventy-one for larceny, a building; 1970, non-sufficient fund…