State v. Keys
| Decision Date | 01 June 1896 |
| Docket Number | 436 |
| Citation | 45 P. 727,4 Kan.App. 14 |
| Parties | THE STATE OF KANSAS v. C. M. KEYS |
| Court | Kansas Court of Appeals |
Opinion Filed July 8, 1896.
MEMORANDUM.--Appeal from Brown district court; R. M. EMERY judge. Prosecution for an illegal sale of intoxicating liquor. Defendant, C. M. Keys, was convicted. He appeals. Affirmed. The opinion herein, filed July 8, 1896, states the material facts.
Judgment affirmed.
James Falloon, for appellant.
F. B Dawes, attorney general, and D. E. Reber, assistant attorney general for Brown county, for The State.
OPINION
The appellant, C. M. Keys, was prosecuted and convicted in the district court of Brown county for an illegal sale of intoxicating liquor. An examination of the record fails to disclose any error of the trial court to justify a reversal of the judgment. The verdict, being based upon conflicting evidence and having positive testimony to support it, will not, after its approval by the trial judge, be set aside. Error is also assigned upon the refusal of the judge to give the jury the following special instruction:
"The testimony of spotters, that is, persons who purchase liquor with the view to inform and testify against the seller, should be taken with extreme care and suspicion."
We think all that was either proper or necessary to be said to the jury upon that matter was covered by the general charge. In it the jury was instructed closely to scrutinize the testimony of any one who acted in the transaction as a detective or spotter, and who may have a motive for testifying to illegal sales when none was in fact made. The jury was also given the usual general rules for their guidance in weighing the testimony of the witnesses and in determining their credibility. There is little, if anything, in this case upon which to base the instruction asked.
There is often, in the opinion of the writer, undue agitation about "spotter" testimony in this class of offenses, and a disposition to magnify an act which may have been inspired by an honest, unselfish desire to detect crime into such proportions as unjustly to prejudice a jury against the most reputable and truthful witness. The inquiry should be, What character of man is he who speaks from the witness-chair? His interest in or connection with the case on trial, his conduct and demeanor when testifying and his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chapman v. Boynton
...the purchase from one engaged in the illegal selling of intoxicating liquor, intending to testify if called upon to do so. State v. Keys, 4 Kan. App. 14, 45 P. 727. The jugs, bottles, and vessels, supposed to contain intoxicating liquors, procured by an officer in making the arrest in a liq......
-
State v. Roberts
... ... cross-examination, and counsel for the defense may comment ... freely upon their testimony in argument; but even in this ... respect the same broad range of comment is accorded to ... counsel to discuss the credibility of all witnesses. These ... views are supported by: The State v. Keys, 4 ... Kan.App. 14, 45 P. 727; The State v. Eaton, 5 ... Kan.App. 55, 47 P. 317; The State v. Pigg, 78 Kan ... 618, 97 P. 859; The State v. Spiker, 88 Kan. 644, ... 129 P. 195; The State v. Gray, 90 Kan. 486, 135 P ... 566; Clark v. The State, 5 Ga.App. 605, 63 S.E. 606; ... ...
-
The State v. Oliphant
...or "spotters" is to be received with great caution and distrust. State v. Hoxsie, 15 R. I. 1; State v. Bennett, 40 S.C. 308; State v. Keys, 4 Kan.App. 14; v. State, 92 Ala. 37; Hronek v. People, 134 Ill. 139, 8 L. R. A. 839. OPINION JOHNSON, J. --On information of the prosecuting attorney, ......
-
State v. Eaton
...liquor from one reported to be engaged in the illegal sale thereof, intending if called upon to testify thereto." The State v. Keys, 4 Kan.App. 14, 45 P. 727. writer hereof desires to reiterate the following comments of Garver, J., in the case last cited, and adopt them as his own: "There i......