Court Opinion

ID: 9694881
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 17:59:32.156987+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:06.603861
License: Public Domain

MERRILL, Justice
(dissenting).
There is no difference of opinion between the majority and me as to the law enunciated in that opinion. The disagreement comes in the application of that law to the facts as stated in the opinion. From a reading of the record, my interpretation of the facts differs from those recited in the majority opinion, and lead me to a conclusion that the statement of the defendant related by Marible was not a veiled threat against the deceased or any agent of the city, and when all the circumstances are *129considered, even if error was committed, it was not prejudicial to the rights of the defendant.
I, therefore, respectfully dissent.
LAWSON, J., concurs in the foregoing dissent.