Court Opinion

ID: 9707912
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 02:24:36.010704+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:39.849333
License: Public Domain

Clinton, J.,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. In my judgment the evidence identifying the defendant as the utterer of the forged instrument is wholly insufficient to establish such identity beyond a reasonable doubt. This identification depends completely upon the testimony of John J. Essay. Neither cashier could identify the defendant as the man who attempted to pass the check. Essay identified only an Indian wearing a Vietnam jacket, who was very intoxicated. His eyes were bloodshot. He was weaving and staggering. The officers who arrested the defendant within 5 to 15 minutes of the incident testified positively that the defendant was sober.
This case does not present a question of mere credibility of the witnesses for the jury to decide. It is so inherently contradictory that the contradiction can, be resolved only by speculation. We refer especially to the testimony as to, the sobriety of the utterer and the defendant who was arrested. Where speculation and not reasonable inference must be resorted to there is no identification beyond a reasonable doubt.
McCown, J., joins in this dissent.