¶1(dissenting)- — -I am unable to agree’ with the majority herein. It is true the case was not well presented by the State’s attorney in the court below, but I am inclined to *742believe the matters complained of were due to a lack of careful preparation and were not intentional departures from the well-established rules of evidence. Nevertheless, I feel the trial court amply protected defendant and no prejudicial error sufficient to reverse is evident. Considerable latitude is extended the trial court in passing on questions of impeachment when a defendant takes the stand in his own behalf, and I cannot find herein any serious abuse of that discretion. In view of the seriousness of the crime charged and the clear guilt of the defendant, I feel we should be most reluctant to chastise the State’s attorney for his shortcomings and reverse upon the rather technical grounds set forth in the majority opinion. I would affirm.
248 Iowa 733
82 N.W.2d 105
State v. Tolson
Decided April 3, 1957
Supreme Court of Iowa · decided 1957-04-03
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1957-04-03
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently April 2016
18 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →