From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Rolph

Oregon Supreme Court
Sep 29, 1965
406 P.2d 158 (Or. 1965)

Opinion

Argued September 15, 1965

Affirmed September 29, 1965

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County.

VIRGIL LANGTRY, Judge.

Oscar D. Howlett, Portland, argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.

Tom P. Price, Deputy District Attorney, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was George Van Hoomissen, District Attorney, Portland.

Before McALLISTER, Chief Justice, and SLOAN, DENECKE, HOLMAN and LUSK, Justices.


AFFIRMED.


Defendant was convicted of the charge of selling narcotics. A Portland police officer made the purchase from defendant. When defendant's counsel cross-examined the officer he was permitted to question the officer at length as to the officer's financial situation. It was an attempt to discredit the officer.

The state then called the policeman's superior officer who was permitted, over objection, to testify to the policeman's efficiency rating. In this appeal defendant claims the court erred in admitting the evidence. The error was immaterial. The evidence was so inconsequential and so irrelevant to the issue of guilt or innocence that it could not have been prejudicial.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Rolph

Oregon Supreme Court
Sep 29, 1965
406 P.2d 158 (Or. 1965)
Case details for

State v. Rolph

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON v. ROLPH

Court:Oregon Supreme Court

Date published: Sep 29, 1965

Citations

406 P.2d 158 (Or. 1965)
406 P.2d 158

Citing Cases

State ex Rel. Shenk v. State Board of Examiners

Diagnosis is stressed. That is as it should be. Diagnosis (see State v. Rolph, 140 Minn. 190, 167 N.W. 553,…

Ingebritson v. Tjernlund Mfg. Co.

See, also, State ex rel. Wentworth v. Fahey, 152 Minn. 220, 188 N.W. 260. In State v. Rolph, 140 Minn. 190,…