“It is a first principle that the jury, as finder of fact, has the function of determining the credibility of witnesses, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of justifiable inferences ' from proven facts.”
How later courts described this case
- “It is a first principle that the jury, as finder of fact, has the function of determining the credibility of witnesses, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of justifiable inferences ' from proven facts.”
- fact that pistol was never recovered did not prevent jury from inferring it was operable based on victim's testimony about how pistol was displayed
- robbery victim forced to lie on the floor by appellant, who stood above and pointed a gun at him
- operability of pistol may be proved by circumstantial evidence
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
NEWMAN, Chief Judge,
dissenting:
I decline to join the majority’s unprincipled holding that because an object looked like a pistol and was described by the victim of an armed robbery as being one, a jury could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that it was a pistol in operable condition. To affirm a conviction of carrying a pistol without a license on such lack of proof of operability raises issues of constitutional dimension. See Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 U.S. 684 , 95 S.Ct. 1881 , 44 L.Ed.2d 508 (1975) (prosecution must establish each element of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt); Thompson v. City of Louisville, 362 U.S. 199 , 80 S.Ct. 624 , 4 L.Ed.2d 654 (1960) (conviction devoid of evidentiary support violates the Due Process Clause).