(DOWNLOAD) "State v. Keller" by Supreme Court of Montana # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: State v. Keller
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 28, 1952
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 56 KB
Description
1. Witnesses ? Latitude in examining witnesses. Wide latitude should be allowed on cross-examination of witness, and court may permit examination into collateral matters when they affect credibility of witness. 2. Witnesses ? No abuse of discretion in refusing permission to cross-examine. In prosecution for obtaining money by false pretenses by misrepresenting weight of load of shelled corn, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to permit cross-examination of witness. 3. Criminal Law ? Admission of experimental evidence. Question of admission of experimental evidence is one addressed to discretion of trial court and its action will not be disturbed, where it appears that experiments were made under essentially different conditions from those existing in case on trial, but substantial similarity of conditions is all that is necessary to render such evidence admissible, and whether circumstances are sufficiently similar to render results of experiment competent is preliminary question for court, and, unless too wide of the mark, ruling thereon will be upheld on appeal. 4. Criminal Law ? Experiments on different scales properly excluded. There was no abuse of discretion in trial courts exclusion of evidence of results of experiments calculated to disclose that discrepancies or variations in weights may be obtained, where experiments in question were conducted on scales different from that used in committing alleged offense and trial Judge indicated that he would permit experiment on scales on which weighing giving rise to case actually took place. 5. Criminal Law ? Explaining "out of order" sign proper. Where defendants sought to introduce results of weighing experiment conducted on scale other than that on which weighing giving rise to case took place, and explained that at time of experiment latter scale had borne sign reading "out of order," it was not error to permit evidence that "out of order" sign indicated merely that operator of scales was out of weigh slips and not that the scales themselves had become defective. 6. Partnership ? Admissibility of verbal declaration of partnership. In prosecution for obtaining money by false pretenses by misrepresenting weight of load of shelled corn sold to seed company, it - Page 143 would have been necessary to exclude testimony to effect that one defendant had told police detective that he and his co-defendant were partners if such testimony had been objected to. 7. Criminal Law ? Effect of hearsay evidence. Hearsay evidence, even if admitted without objection, should not be permitted to outweigh positive and uncontradicted evidence to the contrary. 8. Criminal Law ? Admissibility ? Acts and declaration in furtherance of conspiracy. Where two or more persons have unlawfully conspired to commit crime, acts and declarations of any conspirator pending such conspiracy and in furtherance thereof are admissible against others on trial, and same rule applies in case of unlawful combination short of conspiracy, but rule has no application after common enterprise is at end. 9. Criminal Law ? Evidence insufficient to establish partnership. In prosecution for obtaining money by false pretenses by misrepresenting weight of load of shelled corn sold to seed company, where there was evidence in record without objection to effect that one defendant had told police detective that he and other defendant were co-partners, and that they had bought corn in another state, it was error to refuse offered instruction to effect that verbal declaration of one defendant that he and co-defendant were partners was insufficient to establish partnership relation, notwithstanding fact that court gave instruction that ownership of corn sold was not in issue.