Court Opinion

ID: 9724175
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 10:47:50.475353+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:57.068518
License: Public Domain

DUNN, J.
I respectfully dissent.
It seems to me that the testimony does not warrant a reversal.
Dr. Parr testified that: “A. It was my opinion that he needed to have his stomach emptied. ... He had ingested a significant amount of heroin. He could be in danger of having a toxic reaction.”
“A. I treated him on the basis of my medical judgment. .. . That he had ingested heroin, that if I did not treat him, I could possibly endanger his life or his life would be in danger.”
“The Witness: I think the effects of gastric acid on rubber, if you use the term genetically, there are many different kinds of plastics and latens and different rubber compounds. Some are disintegrated by stomach acid and some have no effect.”
The defense testimony by Dr. Nelson, that less than 1 percent of balloons might be dissolved by gastric juices is not conclusive.
I would sustain the judgment.
A petition for a rehearing was denied July 27, 1977, and respondent’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied September 1, 1977.