Court Opinion

ID: 8201361
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 23:32:15.708133+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:40:56.194800
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam.
The court concludes the trial court correctly and completely responded to the jury’s inquiry of whether the defendant could be convicted on only an accomplice’s testimony. Testimony of an accomplice, even if it is uncorroborated, can support a verdict of guilty if it is of such a nature that it is entitled to belief. Jandrt v. State (1969), 43 Wis. 2d 497, 499, 168 N. W. 2d 602; see also: Cheney v. State (1969), 44 Wis. 2d 454, 467, 468, 171 N. W. 2d 339, 174 N. W. 2d 1.
Therefore, the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial.
The order is affirmed.