Supreme Court of New Mexico
Decision Information
American Life Ins. Co. of Detroit, Mich. v. Brian - cited by 4 documents
State v. Bailey - cited by 81 documents
Decision Content
STATE V. SCHULTZ, 1929-NMSC-058, 34 N.M. 214, 279 P. 561 (S. Ct. 1929)
STATE
vs.
SCHULTZ
No. 3359
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO
1929-NMSC-058, 34 N.M. 214, 279 P. 561
July 24, 1929
Appeal from District Court, Union County; Kiker, Judge.
Theodore W. Schultz was convicted of embezzlement, and he appeals.
SYLLABUS
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
1. Not error to refuse instruction, the subject-matter of which is covered by instructions given.
2. Inquiry may be permitted of accused person on cross-examination as to specific acts of wrongdoing affecting his credibility.
COUNSEL
H. B. Woodward, of Clayton, for appellant.
Robert C. Dow, Atty. Gen., and Frank H. Patton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
JUDGES
Watson, J. Bickley, C. J., and Parker, J., concur. Catron and Simms, JJ., did not participate.
OPINION
{*214} {1} OPINION OF THE COURT Appellant was convicted of embezzlement.
{2} We find no merit in the contention based upon the refusal of requested instructions. Their subject-matter was sufficiently included in instructions given. {*215} On cross-examination the court permitted appellant to be asked whether he had not taken mortgaged property out of the state. The ruling was no doubt made on the authority of State v. Bailey, 27 N.M. 145, 198 P. 529, which seems to justify it.
{3} The judgment must be affirmed, and it is so ordered.