Wise v. State, 8547
| Decision Date | 25 March 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 8547,8547 |
| Citation | 92 Nev. 181,547 P.2d 314 |
| Parties | Reggi WISE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent. |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
Reggi Wise was convicted, by jury verdict, of robbery and sentenced to a term of ten (10) years in the Nevada State Prison. Sentence was suspended and Wise was placed on probation for a period of four (4) years. In this appeal Wise contends we should reverse his conviction because (1) he did not receive a fair trial; and, (2) there was insufficient evidence to support the jury verdict. We reject both contentions.
1. In support of the contention that his right to a fair trial was abridged Wise argues the prosecution 'purposely' withheld a portion of its 'case in chief' which was subsequently introduced in the 'guise' of rebuttal testimony. The record establishes the challenged testimony was introduced to show Wise had been in the Golden Nugget Casino immediately after the robbery, a fact he had denied when testifying in his own defense. In this posture, admission of the testimony during rebuttal was permissible. Hilt v. State, 91 Nev. 654, 541 P.2d 645 (1975). See also, Goldsby v. United States, 160 U.S. 70, 16 S.Ct. 216, 40 L.Ed. 343 (1895).
Wise also suggests it was improper for the prosecuting attorney to identify him to witnesses, as he entered the courtroom. This action was not deemed sufficiently prejudicial to warrant an objection when it occurred; therefore, we decline to consider it appeal. Walker v. State, 89 Nev. 568, 516 P.2d 739 (1973).
2. In support of his challenge to the sufficiency of evidence to support the verdict, Wise suggests we should reverse because of the 'inherent unreliability of eyewitness identification.' This novel argument finds no support in this record. During trial Wise was positively identified by two witnesses as the individual who committed the charged robbery. The weight and credibility of the identifying witnesses testimony is solely within the province of the jury. Azbill v. State, 88 Nev. 240, 495 P.2d 1064 (1972); King v. State, 87 Nev. 537, 490 P.2d 1054 (1971).
The ancillary contention that the in court identification was tainted, because Wise was confronted by a prosecution witness...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Olsen
...(9th Cir. 1960); Moore v. People, 171 Colo. 338, 467 P.2d 50 (1970); State v. Phipps, 224 Kan. 158, 578 P.2d 709 (1978); Wise v. State, 92 Nev. 181, 547 P.2d 314 (1978); State v. Fischer, 232 Or. 558, 376 P.2d 418 (1962); State v. Amory, 1 Or.App. 496, 464 P.2d 714 (1970). But see People v.......
-
Steese v. State
...ruled inadmissible. "The weight and credibility of eyewitness testimony is solely within the province of the jury." Wise v. State, 92 Nev. 181, 183, 547 P.2d 314, 315 (1976). Here, Steese was presumably aware at the time of trial of Moore's description of the person accompanying Soules. Ste......
-
White v. State
...The weight and credibility of the testimony of identifying witnesses is within the exclusive province of the jury. Wise v. State, 92 Nev. 181, 183, 547 P.2d 314, 315 (1976). Where there is, as here, substantial evidence to support a verdict in a criminal case, this court will not disturb th......
-
Jones v. State
...Ordinarily, the weight and credibility of identification testimony is solely within the province of the jury. Wise v. State, 92 Nev. 181, 183, 547 P.2d 314, 315 (1976). We will not usurp that function, especially where, as here, the record supports a finding that the pretrial identification......