State v. Braniff

Citations

• 105 Wash. 327
• 177 P. 801
• 1919 Wash. LEXIS 574

Syllabus

<p>Larceny (25, 28)—Evidence—Sufficiency. The positive testimony of two accomplices that accused assisted and participated in the stealing of horses, sustains a conviction of larceny; the credibility of the witnesses being for the jury.</p> <p>Witnesses (127)—Corroboration—Previous Consistent Statements. In a prosecution for larceny, in which practically the only testimony against the accused was that of two accomplices, which was not “assailed” by the defense by any impeaching evidence otherwise than by the opening statement that it was a “frame up,” and by cross-examination, it is error to allow the state, in its case in chief, to corroborate the witnesses by testimony of the sheriff that, in his confession, one of the accomplices had made previous consistent statements. .</p>