 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Fey8/8/2000
ohol containers that Russell had removed from the car the night of the crash. Fey argues that he did not know that Russell had spoken with police the day before he visited the field; however, the jury was free to determine his credibility on that matter. See, e.g., State v. Clay, 1998 MT 244, 32, 291 Mont. 147, 32, 967 P.2d 370, 32 (citation omitted) (concluding " ' t is within the province of the finder of fact to weigh the evidence presented and determine the credibility of witnesses' ").
This evidence clearly "tend to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense." Section 46-16-213, MCA.
22 We hold that the District Court did not err in concluding that there was sufficient corroborating evidence in support of Russell's testimony.
23 Affirmed.
W. WILLIAM LEAPHART
We concur: J. A. TURNAGE JIM REGNIER KARLA M. GRAY JAMES C. NELSON
|