State v. King

Citations

• 102 Kan. 155
• 169 P. 557
• 1917 Kan. LEXIS 240

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. WITNESS — Improper Impeaching Questions on Cross-examination. The credibility of a witness may be impeached on cross-examination by showing that he has previously made statements inconsistent with or contradictory to his evidence given on the trial; but it is not reversible error to exclude previous explanation of prior contradictory • statements, when that explanation is not contradictory to or inconsistent with his evidence on the trial.</p> <p>2. Kobbery — Using Automobile — Competent Opinion Evidence. Where the evidence tends to show that a robbery was committed in a store by four persons who came in an automobile, two of whom remained in the automobile in front of the store, while the other two committed the robbery, evidence may be introduced to show that those who aftetward sat in an automobile in front of the store, under conditions similar to those existing at the time of the robbery, could see into the store to the place where the robbery was committed.</p> <p>3. Same — Trial—Photograph Competent Evidence. A photograph of one charged with the commission of a crime may be introduced in evidence for the purpose of corroborating a witness who identifies the one charged, and the fact that it was found in a rogue’s gallery does not render the photograph incompetent.</p> <p>4. Same — Statements of Defendant on Former Trial — Competent. The testimony of a defendant in a criminal action, given on a former or another trial, may be introduced in evidence against him.</p> <p>5. Same. The evidence has been examined and it is held that it was sufficient to sustain the verdict, and that the verdict was not contrary to law nor to the evidence.</p>