Court Opinion

ID: 9655015
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 18:57:56.445628+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:15.558365
License: Public Domain

Ed. F. McFaddin, Associate Justice, dissenting. I am •of the opinion that the admonition given by the Trial Court <cured any error of the Prosecuting Attorney, even if, in fact, lie mis-stated the evidence. When the defendants’ attorney objected to the statements by the Prosecuting Attorney the Court said: “The jury heard the evidence. If the Prosecuting Attorney misquoted it, then they are the judges of it. ’ ’ Jurors are sensible persons. They had heard the witnesses and knew whether the Prosecuting Attorney was misquoting the evidence. The Court told the jury in the instructions: “In this case as in all others you are the sole and exclusive judges of the evidence, its weight, its sufficiency, and also the credibility of the witnesses. . .” That instruction, coupled with the admonition previously quoted- — I maintain — was sufficient to cure any misstatement of the evidence. See 88 C.J.S. p. 391, “Trial” § 197, and see particularly Martin v. Kelley, 97 N. H. 466, 92 Atl. 2d 163, where a very similar admonition by the Court to the jury was held to have cured any misstatement of the evidence.