adopting, prior to promulgation of the Indiana Rules of Evidence, federal evidentiary rules standard for admission of duplicates, including enlargements, which rules are substantially the same as Indiana rules with regard to admission of duplicates
How later courts described this case
- adopting, prior to promulgation of the Indiana Rules of Evidence, federal evidentiary rules standard for admission of duplicates, including enlargements, which rules are substantially the same as Indiana rules with regard to admission of duplicates
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Concurring Opinion
Hoffman, J.
I concur in result since I do not agree with the reasoning permitting the admission of a photograph of a check into evidence.
The photograph of the check was admissible since it was proved to be a true representation of that which it purports to represent and it was competent evidence because the witness could testify to give a verbal description of the check.
The check was the objeet stolen and it could have been verbally described by a witness. Hawkins v. State (1941), 219 Ind. 116 , 37 N.E.2d 79 ; Highshew v. Kushto (1956), 126 *306 Ind. App. 584 , 131 N.E.2d 652 (transfer denied, 235 Ind. 505 , 134 N.E.2d 555 ).
Note. — Reported at 348 N.E.2d 90 .