Court Opinion

ID: 9791863
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:19:38.120069+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:38.979877
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
Petition for rehearing. The Court of Appeals, Langtry, J., held that error involved in allowing evidence of a jury conviction of defense witness on which judgment had not been entered, though not harmless at the time, became harmless when witness was subsequently sentenced on conviction and judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
Reversal and remand for a new trial withdrawn and judgment affirmed.
*150Lee Johnson, Attorney General, and Jacob B. Tanzer, Solicitor General, Salem, for petition.
No appearance contra.
Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Langtry and Brancheield, Judges.
LANGTRY, J.
4. In a petition for rehearing, the state agrees with our determination of the principal question involved in this case. However, the state contends that the error was harmless because Snedeker has since been sentenced on the conviction and the judgment has been affirmed by this court and mandate has issued. State v. Snedeker, 3 Or App 482, 474 P2d 770 (October 2, 1970). On a new trial Snedeker’s credibility could be impeached just as it was in the previous trial, this time without error. We agree that the error involved in allowing evidence of a jury conviction of Snedeker on which judgment has not been entered, though not harmless at the time, has been rendered harmless by the judgment subsequently entered. No meritorious object would be served by a new trial. Defendant has not been prejudiced by the error and the judgment should be affirmed. State v. McLean, 1 Or App 147, 459 P2d 559 (1969), aff'd 255 Or 464, 468 P2d 521 (1970).
The reversal and remand for a new trial are withdrawn.
Judgment affirmed.