From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weist v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Apr 18, 1966
401 S.W.2d 565 (Ark. 1966)

Opinion

No. 5160

Opinion delivered April 18, 1966

CRIMINAL LAW — APPEAL ERROR — RULING ON MOTION TO STRIKE EVIDENCE. — In a prosecution for negligent homicide upon proof that accused's drunken driving caused the collision, no prejudice resulted to accused where trial court permitted prosecuting attorney, over defense counsel's objection, to ask a witness if he knew accused drank and the question was never answered.

Appeal from Craighead Circuit Court, Jonesboro Dist., John S. Mosby, Judge; affirmed.

Frank Sloan, N. B. Howard and Jack Segars, for appellant.

Bruce Bennett, Attorney General, Fletcher Jackson, Asst. Atty. General, for appellee.


The appellant was convicted of negligent homicide upon proof that his drunken driving caused a traffic collision in which Don Taylor Gazaway was killed. The jury fixed the penalty at imprisonment for one year and a fine of $500.00.

For reversal the appellant urges a single point, that the trial court erred in permitting the prosecuting attorney, over the objection of defense counsel, to ask the witness Gage if he knew that the accused drank. A complete answer to this contention is simply that the question was never answered; so there could have been no prejudice. Reynolds v. State, 220 Ark. 188, 246 S.W.2d 724 (1952). Supreme Court of Arkansas

Affirmed.

AMSLER, J., not participating.


Summaries of

Weist v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Apr 18, 1966
401 S.W.2d 565 (Ark. 1966)
Case details for

Weist v. State

Case Details

Full title:WEIST v. STATE

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Apr 18, 1966

Citations

401 S.W.2d 565 (Ark. 1966)
401 S.W.2d 565

Citing Cases

Utley v. State

Many dangerous actions that inattentive drivers engage in do not give rise to criminal liability. See, e.g.…