Court Opinion

ID: 9578419
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:45:05.659883+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:24:55.143404
License: Public Domain

SPENCE, J.
dissent.
It would serve no useful purpose to review further the sordid details of the testimony relating to appellants’ drunken debauch and the brutal treatment inflicted upon the deranged victim. Disregarding entirely the testimony of Miss Nelson, there was abundant evidence which pointed unerringly to the guilt of appellants on all counts. I am therefore of the opinion that the error, if any, in striking the evidence tending to impeach the testimony of Miss Nelson was not prejudicial and that it cannot be said to have resulted in a miscarriage of justice. (Const., art. VI, § 4y2.)
Shenk, J., and Edmonds, J., concurred.