Where jury could find from evidence, including defendant's conviction six years earlier of kidnapping, rape and sodomy and defendant's acts in trying to get victim to go with him and following her home, that he took substantial steps toward commission of kidnapping, rape and sodomy, there is sufficient evidence for court to enter conviction of attempted kidnapping, rape and sodomy. Where action mixes claim for legal and equitable relief, judgment notwithstanding verdict may be upheld only if no evidence exists to support jury verdict. Affirmances notwithstanding error Generally. Court may exercise its power to affirm, notwithstanding the error, if error was either so technical in nature or so unsubstantial that as practical matter there was little, if any, likelihood that erroneous evidence affected verdict. Court assumes prejudice has resulted from error unless record affirmatively reflects contrary.
State has burden of proving lack of prejudice.
Under this section, for affirmance despite error, defendant must have received fair trial, there must have been substantial and convincing evidence of guilt, and any error committed was unlikely to have changed result. If conditions of this section are met, judgment of court appealed from shall be affirmed for no discretion is permitted by mandate of this section. Erroneous rulings on evidence. Where there was overwhelming evidence that defendant committed murder with which he was charged, error in admission of evidence of other crimes committed subsequent to the murder for which he was charged was harmless. Evidential error is not presumed prejudicial, and party alleging error must show error affected substantial rights.