Heivner v. People

• Court: Colorado Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: [7 Colo.App. 459] THOMSON, J.
• Citation: Heivner v. People, 7 Colo.App. 458, 43 P. 1047 (Colo. App. 1896)
• Decision Date: 10 February 1896
• Parties: HEIVNER v. PEOPLE.

43 P. 1047

7 Colo.App. 458

HEIVNER v. PEOPLE.

Court of Appeals of Colorado

February 10, 1896

Error to district court, Jefferson county.

Frank Heivner was convicted of a crime, and brings error. Reversed.

H.G Benson and S.W. Johnson, for plaintiff in error.

Byron Carr, Atty. Gen. (Calvin E. Reed, of counsel), for the People.

THOMSON, J.

The plaintiff in error was tried and convicted of larceny of a cow. Outside of the testimony of one Ira Stewart, evidence pointing towards the guilt of the defendant was meager, and insufficient to sustain a verdict of guilty. Stewart testified that he helped the defendant in stealing the cow and made statements which, if true, were amply sufficient to convict both of them of larceny. He also testified that he had been convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for stealing cattle, upon the testimony of the defendant. Stewart's testimony, even on paper, betrays a vindictiveness against the defendant, sufficient to throw doubt upon his statements as consisting of unvarnished facts. The defendant, as a witness for himself, denied all of Stewart's statements which tended to fasten the charge upon him, and denied his guilt. The court, among its other instructions, gave the following: "The court instructs the jury that the witness Ira Stewart is what is known in law as an accomplice; and that, while it is a rule of law that a person accused of crime may be convicted upon the testimony of an accomplice, still a jury should always act upon such testimony with great care and caution, and subject it to careful examination in the light of all the other evidence in the case, and the jury ought not to convict upon such testimony alone, unless, after a careful examination of such testimony, they are...