Court Opinion

ID: 9541471
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:25:48.430001+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:57.040799
License: Public Domain

Fontron, J.,
dissenting: I agree that the admission of the defendant’s prior conviction was error. However, I am unable to say it was harmless error.
Under the circumstances of this case the presumption must be indulged that the former conviction, admitted in error, was considered by the court and entered into its decision. (See Rule 116, 201 Kan. xxx1) In view of this presumption, and in view of the circumstantial nature of the evidence, except defendant’s own testimony which was exculpatory in character, it would be presumptuous, in my view, for us to say the error was innocuous.
Accordingly, I would reverse the judgment and direct a new trial.