Case ID: or_241/html/0410-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued September 15,
    affirmed September 29,1965
    STATE OF OREGON v. ROLPH
    406 P. 2d 158
    
      Oscar D. Howlett, Portland, argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.
    
      Tom P. Price, Deputy District Attorney, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was George Van Hoomissen, District Attorney, Portland.
    Before McAllister, Chief Justice, and Sloan, Denecke, Holman and Lusk, Justices.
   PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted of the charge of selling narcotics. A Portland police officer made the purchase from defendant. When defendant’s counsel cross-examined the officer he was permitted to question the officer at length as to the officer’s financial situation. It was an attempt to discredit the officer.

The state then called the policeman’s superior officer who was permitted, over objection, to testify to the policeman’s efficiency rating. In this appeal defendant claims the court erred in admitting the evidence. The error was immaterial. The evidence was so inconsequential and so irrelevant to the issue of guilt or innocence that it could not have been prejudicial.

Affirmed.