Case Name: STATE OF OREGON v. ROLPH
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1965-09-29
Citations: 241 Or. 410
Docket Number: 
Parties: STATE OF OREGON v. ROLPH
Judges: Before McAllister, Chief Justice, and Sloan, Denecke, Holman and Lusk, Justices.
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 241
Pages: 410–411

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.