State v. Hannigan

5 Citing cases

  1. State v. Bell

    83 Wn. 2d 383 (Wash. 1974)   Cited 23 times

    A trial court is not required to give negative instructions as to matters that will not support a conviction in a criminal case. It is unnecessary to explain those things which will not constitute a crime, though a court may do so in the interest of clarity. State v. Brooks, 73 Wn.2d 653, 440 P.2d 199 (1968); State v. Harvey, 57 Wn.2d 295, 356 P.2d 726 (1960); State v. Hannigan, 3 Wn. App. 529, 475 P.2d 886 (1970). If this proposed instruction had been given, it would have afforded further enlightenment to the jury and afforded assistance to the defendant in clearly presenting his theory of the case; however, it did not constitute prejudicial error to refuse it. The state introduced evidence that one of the defendant's assistants previously had sold drugs illegally in his office.

  2. State v. McCray

    15 Wn. App. 810 (Wash. Ct. App. 1976)   Cited 10 times
    Holding that both the federal and state constitutions protect a person's bank account against unwarranted searches and seizures

    Further, evidence that other worthless checks were issued by the defendant at about the same time as the check upon which the prosecution is based is relevant and competent to show his intent and general plan of operations. State v. Scherer, 77 Wn.2d 345, 351, 462 P.2d 549 (1969); State v. Hannigan, 3 Wn. App. 529, 530, 475 P.2d 886 (1970). The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the checks given to Braniff Airlines into evidence or in allowing the testimony establishing that it was the defendant who passed those checks.

  3. State v. DuPont

    14 Wn. App. 22 (Wash. Ct. App. 1975)   Cited 12 times
    In State v. DuPont, 14 Wn.App. 22, 25, 538 P.2d 823 (1975), the court affirmed a conviction for possession of cocaine, concluding that there was adequate circumstantial evidence to support the jury's conclusion that the defendant was in actual possession.

    A trial court is not required to give negative instructions and its failure to do so does not constitute error. State v. Bell, 83 Wn.2d 383, 518 P.2d 696 (1974); State v. Hannigan, 3 Wn. App. 529, 475 P.2d 886 (1970). Judgment is affirmed.

  4. State v. Bell

    8 Wn. App. 670 (Wash. Ct. App. 1973)   Cited 9 times

    It is unnecessary to explain those things which will not constitute a crime, though a court may do so in the interest of clarity. State v. Brooks, 73 Wn.2d 653, 440 P.2d 199 (1968); State v. Harvey, 57 Wn.2d 295, 356 P.2d 726 (1960); State v. Hannigan, 3 Wn. App. 529, 475 P.2d 886 (1970). If this proposed instruction had been given, it would have afforded further enlightenment to the jury and afforded assistance to the defendant in clearly presenting his theory of the case; however, it did not constitute prejudicial error to refuse it. [6] The state introduced evidence that one of the defendant's assistants previously had sold drugs illegally in his office.

  5. State v. Stott

    4 Wn. App. 494 (Wash. Ct. App. 1971)   Cited 2 times

    An appellate court will not reverse a jury verdict which was based upon substantial evidence. State v. Weiss, 73 Wn.2d 372, 438 P.2d 610 (1968); State v. Hannigan, 3 Wn. App. 529, 475 P.2d 886 (1970). The defendant's second assignment of error is that the arrest of Stott and his codefendant for another crime during the trial was prejudicial error.