# State v. Brown

> Idaho Supreme Court · October 17, 1933 · 53 Idaho 576

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3411493

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE, Respondent, v. JAMES BROWN, Appellant
- **Court:** Idaho Supreme Court
- **Decided:** October 17, 1933
- **Citations:** 53 Idaho 576; 26 P.2d 131; 1933 Ida. LEXIS 158
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Holden
- **Judges:** Wernette, Morgan, Holden, Budge, Givens
- **Cited by:** 26 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3411493

## Opinion text

HOLDEN, J.,
Dissenting. — In harmony with the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in
State v. Orr, ante,
p. 452, 24 Pac. (2d) 685 , to the effect that a defendant has a right to have the jury trying him correctly instructed as
*595
to the law of his case, and it clearly appearing from the record in the case at bar, that Rowe, Bush and the Caseys were accomplices, then Brown had a right to have the jury trying him so instructed, and it was error for the court to refuse to do so, particularly in view of the fact, as stated by Justice Morgan, the jury may have considered that the Bush and Casey testimony corroborated Rowe, and, consequently, I concur in the dissenting opinion of Justice Morgan.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3411493. Public record. Not legal advice.