Sherrer v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that despite testimony to the contrary by co-defendant, “the jury was entitled to believe [his] prior inconsistent statements showing that [the appellant] and [he] were jointly engaged” in the crime for which the appellant was convicted (citation omitted)
• conviction of defendant as party to drug crime supported by prior inconsistent statement of co-defendant showing that the defendant was involved in the drug enterprise
• though not in actual possession of the contraband, defendant was shown to be actively involved in a criminal enterprise to possess methamphetamine
• “If the defendant is proven to be the perpetrator of another drug crime and the facts of that crime are sufficiently similar or connected to the facts of the crime charged, the separate crime will be admissible to prove identity, motive, plan, scheme, bent of mind, or course of conduct”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).