State v. Temby, 24306.
| Decision Date | 06 March 1933 |
| Docket Number | 24306. |
| Citation | 172 Wash. 131,19 P.2d 661 |
| Parties | STATE v. TEMBY. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 2.
Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Malcolm Douglas, Judge.
Richard J. Temby was convicted of practicing surgery without a license, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Chas. D. Donnelly, of Seattle, for appellant.
Robert M. Burgunder and Ben A. Maslan, both of Seattle, for the State.
Appellant, a licensed sanipractor, was tried and found guilty by a jury upon a charge of practicing surgery without a license. From a judgment and sentence upon the verdict he has appealed.
In everything relating to the nature of the charge, the evidence offered and the instructions given, this case is in all respects similar to and governed by the case of State v. Lydon (Wash.) 16 P.2d 848, recently decided. We do not feel called upon to enter into a reexamination of the questions decided in that case, but are content to follow it. Therefore this judgment must be affirmed, unless some trial error occurred to the prejudice of appellant.
The only error here assigned, not decided adversely to the appellant by the Lydon Case, is one based upon the cross-examination by the state of one of appellant's witnesses. We have gone to the statement of facts for the full transcript of the direct and cross-examination of this witness, and, after a careful study of all that the record reveals, we are satisfied that the cross-examination complained of was wholly proper and justified for the purpose of showing the personal interest of the witness in the outcome of the trial and thus bearing upon the question of his credibility. In all such matters the trial court has a wide discretion, and here we find nothing at all indicating an abuse of that discretion.
Finding no error, the judgment is affirmed
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Robbins
... ... 597, 84 P. 1129; State v. Henry, ... 143 Wash. 39, 254 P. 460; State v. Linden, 171 Wash ... 92, 17 P.2d 635; State v. Temby, 172 Wash. 131, 19 ... P.2d 661; State v. Robinson, 24 Wash.2d 909, 167 ... P.2d 986. It is generally recognized, however, that the ... ...
-
State v. Kelsey
...354, 16 P.2d 848, 850, we said: (a) Drugless healing includes sanipractic, though not specifically named. See, also, State v. Temby, 1933, 172 Wash. 131, 19 P.2d 661. '(b) The practice of surgery means "to sever or penetrate the tissues of human '(c) 'The appellant makes some further conten......
-
State v. Robinson
... ... discretion of the trial court, and its ruling will not be ... disturbed unless the discretion has been abused. State v ... Temby, 172 Wash. 131, 19 P.2d 661; Moffitt v ... Goldcamp, 195 Wash. 75, 79 P.2d 695. We find that the ... court properly exercised its ... ...
-
Flanagan v. Farrington, 24181.
... ... her brother and purchased a half acre of land in Whatcom ... county, this state, which later she traded for a house and ... lot in Bellingham, Wash. In addition to the half ... ...