Court Opinion

ID: 9575716
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:16:13.862285+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:50.770899
License: Public Domain

WARD, J.
I concur in the judgement I am satisfied that proof to a moral certainty and beyond all reasonable *361doubt was presented in the trial court that the “weapon” used in the perpetration of the offense charged against the appellant was a “dangerous” weapon. The exhibit in question is not a legal document which requires judicial interpretation, but merely a mechanism the dangerous character of . which is a question of fact. It is my opinion that the evidence contributed by members of a reviewing court has no weight unless a higher tribunal directs that questions of fact other than those referred to in the state Constitution shall be determined by an appellate court. In brief, this is a case in which justices of an appellate court affirm the trial court’s findings by personal “examination” of the facts. If such affirmation is allowed, then negation of such conclusion should be permitted. This leads to substitution of factual conclusions by an appellate court though there may be no abuse of discretion by the trial judge or jury.