Court Opinion

ID: 9528323
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:39:45.901519+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:26:46.067511
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE METCALF:
(dissenting).
The judgment should be affirmed.
The jury was properly instructed and it was not error to not have changed the result in the case.
*62As to tbe proof of a prior conviction, I believe the statute gives the county attorney the option of impeaching a witness, or the defendant if he is a witness in his own.behalf, by asking him if he has ever been convicted of a felony, or by “the record of the judgment”. R. C. M. 1947, sec. 93-1901-11. State v. Coloff, 125 Mont. 31, 231 Pac. (2d) 343, held that if the county attorney initially chose to impeach by examination of the witness, then he could not introduce the judgment. But the case at bar further restricts the statute so that for all practical purposes the county attorney is limited to impeachment by examination and cannot introduce the judgment. I also believe that it is proper to permit the jury to know of what crime the witness was convicted.