Categories: Utah Court Opinions

STATE v. MAESTES, 21 Utah 2d 367 (1968)

445 P.2d 983

STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. David Eugene MAESTES, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 11227.Supreme Court of Utah.
October 17, 1968.

Appeal from the Second District Court, Weber County, John F. Wahlquist, J.

Page 368

David Eugene Maestes, pro se.

Phil L. Hansen, Atty. Gen., Gerald G. Gundry, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.

HENRIOD, Justice:

M appeals from a jury verdict and judgment of conviction for stealing a stereo. Affirmed.

He says 1) he was not afforded the interdictions of Miranda v. State of Arizona,[1] which appears not so; 2) that there was insufficient evidence to convict, which the record reflects is not so; 3) that it was error for the police officer not to disclose his informant, — no one asking him to and this point being raised for the first time on appeal, and not being a point on appeal in any event; and 4) that a refused requested instruction constituted error, which is not so.

CROCKETT, C. J., and CALLISTER and TUCKETT, JJ., concur.

ELLETT, Justice, concurs in the result.

[1] 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694, 10 A.L.R.3d 974 (1966).

jdjungle